Skip to main content

Full text of "Bulletin 3"

See other formats



jiiANrOKU UüilAftT 

ÜLC 'SJ 1964 


Number 3 1963 

Digitized by 


Supplementary Notes on Finds from Ajia Irini in Cyprus 

Kreta, Tiber und Stora Mellösa 

Bemerkungen zu zwei Bronzeschwertem aus dem Tiber 


A Black-Figured Neck-Amphora of the Leagros Group 

A Republican Portrait from the Sabina 

Editorial and Distribution OfiBoe: 

Medelbavsmuseet. Stoigatan 41, Stodtbolm ö, Sweden. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

The Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities 



Number 3 1963 

Published by The Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities (Medelhavsmuseet) 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

Published with the aid of a grant from Humanistiska Forskningsrädet. 
® 1963 Medelhavsmuseet, Stockholm. 

Stockholm 1963 

Victor Pettcrsons Bokindustri AB 

Digitized by 

Supplementary Notes on Finds 
from Ajia Irini in Cyprus 



The village of Ajia Irini is situated not far from 
the shore of the N.W. coast of Cyprus. A 
sanctuary dose by this village was excavated by 
the Swedish Cyprus Expedition in 1929—1930. 
These excavations yielded results important for 
our knowledge of the history of Cypriote religion 
and the sculptural art of the island. The evidence 
bearing upon the history of religion has been 
studied by Erik SjöqvistS the architectural 
remains and the objects found are published in 
Swed, Cyp. Exp, II, pp. 642 ff. In time the finds 
ränge from the final period of the Bronze Age, 
Late Cypriote III, to c. 500 B.C., i.e. a short 
time before the end of the Cypro-Archaic epoch, 
with the addition of an insignificant revival of 
the cult in the Hellenistic period after a com- 
plete intemiption during the Cypro-Qassical 
time. The cult practised in the sanctuary was 
from the beginning a fertility cult and the deity 
was conceived in the shape of a buU in the 
religious ideas of the worshippers. In Late 
Cypriote III (c. 1200—1050 B.C.) the sanctuary 
consisted of a complex of rectangular houses 
along the sides of a large, open court, with the 
central building as the cult house proper, where 

' Arch,f. ReL Wiss. XXX, 1932, pp. 308 ff. 

all the cult requisites were found. In the be- 
ginning of the Cypro-Geometric period, c. 
1050 B.C., this sanctuary was covered by a 
thick layer of sterile, red earth and on top of 
the same a sanctuary of quite another type was 
constructed: an open temenos of an irregularly 
oval shape, surrounded by a peribolos wall of 
red earth and with a low altar and a libation 
table, dose by the altar, as a sacred centre. 
The majority of the ex votos consisted of terra- 
cotta bulls and from this we may infer that 
the cult remained a cult of fertility and that the 
deity was still conceived in the shape of abuU. 

This Geometrie temenos lasted to the middle 
of Cypro-Geometric III, c. 775 B.C., when the 
sanctuary was subject to some modifications. 
The peribolos wall was heightened and the 
earlier altar was replaced by a new one in the 
shape of a rectangular pillar. The majority of 
the ex yotos deposed in this new temenos 
consists of three dasses of sculptures: bull 
statuettes, minotaurs, and human figures. The 
minotaurs are composed of a bull’s body and 
a human torso and head. They are represented 
as adorants of the deity worshipped, as his 
attendants. They indicate that for the strictly 
theriomorphous conception of the deity had 
been substituted an initial anthropomorphic 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

idea of the same, as also confirmed by the 
statuettes of human shape. They are the first ex 
votos of human sculptures at Ajia Irini and in 
the subsequent periods this new category of 
ex votos was developcd into the great art sculp- 
ture of Cypro-Archaic I and II. Both in cult and 
art the anthropomorphic idea becomes pre- 
dominant. The great number of armed figures 
among the votive sculptures, the chariot sta- 
tuettes, etc. indicate that the deity was a god of 
war as well as a god of fertility, whose attributes, 
the thunderbolts (pp. 27, 40) show that his ca- 
pacity of fertility also included the fertilizing rain: 
in other words, he was a god of general protection 
for the society, a theos sosipolis. 

The particular importance of the votive 
sculptures of Ajia Irini for the elucidation of the 
history of Cypriote sculptural art during the 
Archaic period lies in the fact that these sculp- 
tures were found in stratigraphically distinct 
contexts*, so that, for their chronological deter- 
mination, we are not dependent solely on 
stylistic criteria but have also supplementary 
stratigraphical evidence. In the excavation re- 
port the art sculpture* has been classified in a 

* The stratification, as described in detail in the excava- 
tion report, op. dt. II, pp. 797 ff., was in the Cypro-Archaic 
period to a large extent formed by alluvial sand and gravel 
brought down by heavy winter rains flooding the open air 
sanctuary on several occasions: in the early part of Cypro- 
Archaic II, about the middle of that period and at the 
beginning of its final phase, in absolute figures, c. 560, 540, 
and 500 B.C. After the inundations of c. 560 and 540 B.C. 
the new floor of the sanctuary was levelled on top of the 
alluvial material but the earlier sculptures were left on 
their original level, and new sculptures were deposed on 
the each time raised level. The small statuettes Standing on 
the floor inundated c. 560 B.C. were finally entirely covered 
by the alluvium and the larger sculptures almost entirely, 
or up to the breast, or waist etc. dependent on their height. 

* In op. dt. p. 777, the various categories of sculptures 
represented at Ajia Irini have been distinguished: the ma- 
jority of the small and larger statuettes are pure idol 
plastic, i.e., they are not of an artistic, but only a sacred 
nature, not produced with artistic intentions, but only for 
religious purposes, to be used as votive offerings; only the 
sculptures bering the impress of an incontestable and 
clearly artistic character may be classified as art sculpture, 
only these sculptures are stylistically determinable, if by 
style is meant an artistic norm producing an intended 
artistic shape; within the idol plastic no styles, only types 
can be distinguished; there are also several mixed speci- 
mens between these two categories (cf. pp. 36 f., 39). 

number of local styles and the stratified levels 
have been used to mark the sequence of the 
local periods. In the general Classification of the 
material imdertaken in Swed. Cyp. Exp. IV:2, 
these local styles have been grouped together 
into a number of general styles and for the local 
periods general chronological periods have been 
substituted. The general styles of the art sculp- 
ture in question are: First Proto-Cypriote, 
Second Proto-Cypriote, Neo-Cypriote, and Ar- 

For the interrelations of these local and general 
styles I refer to Swed. Cyp. Exp. IV :2, p. 93^. 
In this paper I shall use the terms of the general 
Classification when dealing with the art sculpture 
but for the aninud statuettes and the human 
figurines belonging to the category called idol pla- 
stic (pp. 38 f.) I shall use the terms of the minute 
Classification of the different types of this plastic 
made in the excavation report, because these 
types are more confined to a specific locality 
than the styles of the art sculpture and the terms 
for denoting the types of the idol plastic in the 
general Classification made in Swed. Cyp. Exp. 
IV comprise necessarily too many varieties 
and cannot therefore be used to indicate pre- 
cisely one local variety. 

For the relation of the local Ajia Irini periods 
and those of the general chronology I refer to 
Swed. Cyp. Exp. IV:2, pp. 191, 197 f., 207«. It 
goes without saying that these periods overlap 
each other, the intervals of the local periods, as 
mentioned (n. 2), being dependent on the time 
of inundations caused by winter floods. In cases 

*’ From the diagram, loc. dt., it can be seen that the Ajia 
Irini styles I and II correspond to the First Proto-Cypriote 
style, the Ajia Irini styles III and IV correspond to the 
S^ond Proto-Cypriote style, the Ajia Irini styles V and VI 
correspond to the Neo-Cypriote style, the i^ia Irini style 
VII corresponds to the Archaic Q^ro-Greek style. 

‘ Op. dt., pp. 125 ff. 

* It can be seen that the local Period 1 falls within Late 
Cypriote III, Period 2 covers Cypro-Geometric I. II and 
lasted until the middle of Cypro-Geometric III, F^od 3 
from the latter date until about the middle of Q^ro- 
Archaic I, i.e. c. 650 B.C., Period 4 from that date untü the 
early phase of Cypro-Archaic II, or in absolute figures c. 
560 B.C., Period 5 from c. 560 to 540 B.C. and Period 6 
from c. 540 to 500 B.C. 


Digitized by LiOOQle 

where required for a chronological precision 
reference to the local periods will be made in 
this paper, otherwise the terms of the general 
chronology will be used. 

ln accordance with the principles of the 
publication of the excavation reports of the 
Swedish Cyprus Expedition, the finds from the 
sanctuary at Ajia Irini were published when the 
fragmentary objects had becn mended to such 
an extent that a material had been obtained 
that was considered to be sufficient to form a 
basis for the chronological and historical con- 
clusions. When the objects found on every ex- 
cavation site had been prepared for publication 
in this way there remained, however, consider- 
able fragments of pottery, sculptures, etc., 
which were brought to Sweden for studies and 
for further mending. It will take a long time 
before all this fragmentary material has been 
thoroughly examined and mended but it is work 
that is profitable from a scientific point of 
view and will also supply the Museum of Medi- 
terranean Antiquities with many valuable new 
acquisitions obtained from the material already 
existing in the museum. 

For some time Mr. Toulis Souidos has been 
systcmatically working on the fragments of 
lerracottas from Ajia Irini for the purpose of 
putting together the still disjecta membra and 
the results of his efforts are very satisfactory 
from several points of view. When Dr. Vessberg 
invited me to publish a paper on these partly 
new, partly restored finds from Cyprus I accepted 
his Invitation with pleasure as it offered me a 
desirable opportunity to retum for a while to 
my old hunting grounds. A well known proverb 
says: ”Love does not tamish with age.” 

I wish to emphasize that the sculptures dealt 
with here do not include all those from Ajia 
Irini restored by Mr. Souidos. The restored 
terracotta figures not considered here belong, 
however, entirely to the category of idol plastic 
which is already represented by many similar 
specimens and their restoration includes only 
minor details, falling within the sphere of 

museal preservation but of no particular scien- 
tific interest. On the other hand it should be 
noted that some interesting fragmentary sculp- 
tures have been left out of consideration in this 
paper, in the hope that the missing parts will 
be found in the course of continued restoration 
work. It is therefore not out of the question that 
there will be material for a second supplementary 
note on the Ajia Irini sculptures to be published 
on a later occasion. 

Surveying the scientific results of the res- 
toration work we can sum them up in the 
foUowing way: no evidence has appeared in- 
consistent with the historical conclusions drawn 
from the material existing at the time of the 
publication of the excavation report but several 
interesting particulars have been added to our 
picture of the section of ancient life in Cyprus as 
revealed by the finds from Ajia Irini. These 
particulars will be summed up in the final 
chapter of this paper. 

Düring my work in preparing this paper Mr. 
Bror Millberg, draughtsman at the Museum of 
Mediterranean Antiquities, has rendered me 
invaluable Service in many ways for which I 
wish to express my sincerest thanks to him, 
and it is also a pleasure to acknowledge a very 
instructive discussion with Mr. Tom Möller, 
sculptor and teacher at Konstfackskolan, Stock- 
holm, about some technical problems connected 
with the sculptures from Ajia Irini. 

Object register 

N. B. Clay and slip are described only when not mcn- 
tioned in the excavation report and measures are given 
only in case the parts added to the objects have changed 
their principal dimensions. 


No. 2414 (Swed. Cyp. Exp. II, p. 763;. White 
Painted IV— V amphora; the second handle and 
parts of the shoulder and rim added; somewhat 
drooping rim; the vertical lines dividing the 
metope decoration on the shoulder are more 
or less rippled; the outer line of the concentric 
circles, both those on the shoulder and the 
neck, is often thicker than the others but there 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

are also circles formed by concentric lines of 
uniform width; the bodies of the female figurines 
on the handles are modelled by hand but the 
heads are made in a mould, a variety of Type 7 
(op. dt, p. 788), with oval face, curved nose, 
thick lips, elliptic eyes and wig-shaped hair; the 
anns (in part broken off) were bent upwards 
with the hands below the breasts; dressed in a 
long tunic, painted red, with black border and 
black girdle across waist, shoes painted red with 
black top-border; hair black; traces of red paint 
on lips and ears, black on eyes. Incisions of 
signs indicating marks of capacity: iZZZlllUlll: 
The dots indicate the beginning and end of the 
marks of capacity and serve to prevent the 
additions of further signs (Fig. 1). 

Type 1 

No, 2770 {op, dt, p. 774). Horns reconstructed 
from a fragment of a similar Statuette with one 
hom entirely preserved (Fig. 2 b, right) found 
in Square D3; left hind leg added; lower part 
of right hind leg reconstructed (Fig. 2 a and 
b, left). 

Type 4 

No, 2034 {op, dt, p. 749). Right hom added and 
left hom reconstructed in plaster; traces of 
snake curling also from base of right foreleg 
up to neck; small part of back reconstructed 
in plaster as well as left hind leg and base of 
right hind leg (Fig. 3). 

No, 2045 {op, dt, p. 150)+Suppl, No, 2809, To 
the bulFs head, No. 2045, the body, Suppl. No. 
2809, has been added. This Statuette was assigned 
to Type 4 in the excavation report owing to the 
fact that at the time of the publication of that 
report only the head of the Statuette was known 
to exist and that is very similar to those of Type 
4. The discovery of fragments of the body 
joined to the head shows, however, that this 
Statuette fonns properly a type of its own, but 

Fig. I. White Painted IV-V amphora, No. 2414 (a); one 
of the handles (b); indsed signs of capadty (c). 

may also bc considered as a variety of Type 4. 
The body is short and barrel-shaped without 
back-bone; cylindrical legs with somewhat 
widening base; forelegs with knees marked by 
projections; hind legs with ridges marking their 
bony structure; hole on buttock; tail missing, 
but must have been freely hanging; short neck 
with ridged top and brisket in front; triangulär 
head with tubulär mouth; prominent eyes; 
pointed pellet ears; curved homs; traces of 
black paint on mouth. Tail missing and parts of 
ridges on hind legs; left foreleg, parts of body 
and left hom restored in plaster. Brown clay; 
greenish grey-yellow slip. Length 25.3 cm.; 
height 33.0 cm. (Fig. 4). 

Type 5 

No, 2027 {op. dt, p. 749). Left hom added; 
upper part of right hom reconstructed in plas- 
ter; tail falling along left hind leg, instead of 
right hind leg, as stated erroneously in loc, dt, 
(Fig. 5). 

Type 7 

No, 2349 {op. dt. p. 761). Homs and left foreleg 
added; right foreleg reconstructed in plaster 
(Fig. 6). 


No. 1775 {op. dt. p. 740). Tail falling along 
right hind leg; female breasts deflected aside 
beneath the arms and seen in profile; two holes, 
one on ehest and one on buttock (correction of 
misprint in loc. dt.)\ traces of genitalia above 
front hole, similar to those of No. 2320 {op. dt. 
PI. CCXXVn:2); traces of two snakes (not one 
as stated in the excavation report) coiling on 
the sides of the animafs body to human part 
of the body, passing the female breasts behind 
to the neck, perhaps lifted by the hands of the 
minotaur as on No. 2031+2361 {op. dt, PI. 
CCXXVII:!), a minotaur figure that is very simi- 
lar to the one here in question; left arm added; 
left foreleg added; right hind leg reconstmeted 
in plaster; in op. dt. PI. CCXXVII only the 
human part of the Statuette reproduced (Fig. 7). 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 4. Bull Statuette, No. 2045 ’\-Suppl.No. 2809, 

Fig. 3. Bull Statuette, No. 2034. 





Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig, 5. Bull Statuette, No. 2027. 

Fig. 6. Bull Statuette, No. 2349. 

Fig. 7 . Minotaur Statuette, No. 1775 

Fig. 8. Rider Statuette, Suppl.No. 2789. 


Digitized by 


SuppL No. 2789. Fragment of ridcr Statuette; 
the horse with flattened cylindrical body; peg- 
shaped legs; short, somewhat lifted tail; neck 
and head missing; horseman naked; upper part 
of body and left leg missing. Red-brown clay 
and brown slip. Hand-made. Length of horse 
(including tail) 19.0 cm. (Fig. 8). 


No. 1998 {pp. dt. p. 748). Front-cover and side- 
cover of the outer right horse added; left arm of 
warrior resting on shoulder of driver (Fig. 9). 
No. 249+115 (op. cit. p. 683). Front-covers of 
horses added; they are decorated with crescent 
omament in relief and fringed border below; the 
two figures of which only traces were remained 
when op. cit. was published have been largely 
recovered: to the right is the driver, with lower 
part of arms missing; his head is moulded, 

similar to those of the female figurines on the 
amphora, No. 2414 (Fig. 1), and of the sphinx, 
No. 2331 (Fig. 52), with large leaf-shaped eyes, 
full lips, wig-shaped hair-dress, plain beard of 
which the point is broken off; to the left is the 
warrior; head missing; left arm advanced and 
hand resting on left front corner of chariot; 
traces of shield remain on front part of chariot; 
the right arm of warrior resting on back and 
right shoulder of driver; reins of left pair of 
horses and beam and yoke of right pair of 
horses restored in plaster (Fig. 10). 

No. 1123+ 789+1864+1971 (op. cit. p. 711). 
Behind the archer, something has been broken 
off on the chariot, probably remains of a quiver 
with arrows similar to those of No. 2000; body 
of chariot with somewhat concave flanks and 
front (Fig. 11). 

No. 1168 (op. cit. p. 714). The fragments of the 
chariot have been joined as far as possiblc 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 10. Chariot, No. 249+115. 

showing the body of the chariot with concave rear; dome-shaped part excised in front and 

front, slightly curved flanks and open rear; flanks; longitudinal partition wall in the chariot 

plain wheels with projecting hubs; no remains with an erect Support ending in a loop at the 

of driver and warrior; four horses with short, rear; plain wheels, of which only fragment of 

Ihin bodies; peg-shaped legs; roughly shaped, one wheel remains, attached to the flanks of the 

plain front-covers; flattened necks; ”bird’s” chariot. Fragments of two figurines, one in each 

heads with bulging eyes; pellet ears. Beams, compartment: to the left a figurine with the left 

yokes, reins and parts of horses’ bodies missing, arm advanced; most of right arm missing; face 

in part restored in plaster as also small missing damaged; pointed beard and pellet ears; to the 

parts of chariot. Red-brown clay; brown slip. right only cylindrical torso of figurine preserved 

Hand-made. Length 21.0 cm. (Fig. 12). and small part of left arm. No remains of 

Suppl. No. 2790. Fragments of a chariot with horses. Brown clay and slip. Hand-made. 

concave front, slightly curved flanks, and open Length 19.0 cm. (Fig. 13). 


Digitized by v^ooQle 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

No, 2388 {op. cit, p. 162)+SuppL No. 2791. No. 
2388 includes only the charioteer; the resl 
(Suppl. No. 2791) is composed of fragments. 
The chariot is oval in shape, open in the rear; 
it rested by means of two cylindrical, low 
Supports on the disc, which is now missing; 
the chariot has a longitudinal partition wall 
I cnding in the rear with a loop-shaped, erect 
Support; no wheels, only an axis projecting 
from the flanks of the chariot; finger-prints are 
prescrved on the ends of the axes and also in 
part on the light sUp showing that there had 
been no wheels broken off from the axes; either 
the wheels were indicated by paint on the flanks 
of the chariot (there are faint traces of black 
paint on the right flank) or were not indicated 
at all, the axis serving as pars pro toto; in the 
left compartment the charioteer, No. 2388; four 
horses with short bodies; peg-shaped legs; 
wedge-shaped necks with flat front; narrow, 
long heads; incised mouth and nostrils; pellet 
ears; plain head-cover; nose-band; cheek-bands; 

front-covers with crescent-shaped omament in 
relief; outer horse also with similar side-covers; 
tails attached to left legs; yokes across the necks 
and two beams from yokes to chariot; pieces 
missing and in part restored in plaster. Brown 
clay; light-coloured slip, mostly effaced. Hand- 
made. Length 24.5 cm. (Fig. 14). 

No. 804+944+1338 {pp. cit. pp. 696, 702, 720). 
No. 804 refers to the warrior, No. 944 to the 
outer left horses and No. 1338 was described as 
fragments of a chariot. This is rectangular in 
shape and rests directly on the base plate; 
longitudinal partition wall with remains of 
Support in the rear; plain wheels (only one 
preserved) with projecting hubs and attached to 
the flanks of the chariot; in the right compart- 
ment Stands the driver with advanced arms; 
trunk-shaped body; pellet ears; pinched nose; 
pointed cap; in the left compartment is the 
warrior of similar type; arms missing; helmet 
with cheek-pieces; four horses with flattened 
bodies; peg-shaped legs; bodies united with 

15. Chariot, No. 804 + 944 ■¥ 1338. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 16. Group of ring dancers and 
musician, No. 1693 +2083. 

joined pieces of clay; cylindrical, flattened necks; 
plain front-cover; narrow, bird-Uke heads; eyes 
indicated by plain elevations; Winkers; neck- 
covers with plumes broken off; head- and neck- 
cover; neck-band with plain tassel in front; freely 
hanging tails, broken off; yokes, beams and 
reins missing as well as pieces of horses, in part 
restored in plaster. Red-brown clay; light- 
coloured slip, in part effaced. Hand-made. 
Length 24.0 cm. (Fig. 15). 

Suppl, No, 2792, Chariot, fragmentary; only 
base-plate and horses (part missing) preserved; 
the horses are of the type represented in the 
preceding group. Similar clay and slip. Height 
15.8 cm., length 26.5 cm. 

No, 1687 {pp, dt, p. 735). When described in 
loc, dt, only part of the body was preserved and 
erroneously identified with that of a bull Sta- 
tuette. The neck and head have now been joined 
to the body making the bull into a horse. This 
has formed part of a four in hand drawing a 
chariot. The body of the horse is cylindrical, 
short, peg-shaped legs; wedge-shaped neck with 
flattened front; narrow head with prominent 
eyes; head-cover; tail (restored partly in plaster) 


attached to right hind leg; nose missing as well 
as left foreleg, both restored in plaster. Brown 
clay and slip. Hand-made. Length 15.5 cm. 
Suppl, No, 2793, Similar horse with nose pre- 
served, showing incised mouth and nostrils; left 
hind leg and lower part of right fore leg restored 
in plaster. Clay and slip as preceding. Hand- 
made. Length 15.4 cm. 


No. 1693+2083 (op, dt, p. 735). Only three 
figurines had been identified when the descrip- 
tion was made in loc, dt, The group consists 
now of five figurines, two female and two male 
dancers Standing opposite each other along the 
periphery of the disc plate; in the middle is a 
male musician wearing a strap around his left 
Shoulder; this strap probably served to suspend 
a String instrument. The figurines are all made 
in the ”snow-man” technique, with trunk- 
shaped bodies; pellet female breasts; pellet ears 
and noses; the female dancers have long, plain 
hair falling behind; all the figurines have bands 
wound round the head; the dancers have their 
arms outstretched (parts missing). Red-brown 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

day and slip. Hand-made. Disc diam. 16.0 cm.; 
height of figurines 8.5— 9.5 cm. (Fig. 16). 


.Vo. 1726 (pp. dt. p. 737). The head is somewhat 
similar to No. 1 as stated in loc. cit. but shows 
several distinct fcatures of its own. The eyes are 
ev'enly elliptical; the nose has been added and 
is rather thin and protniding as the lips; chin 
with rounded beard and moustache painted in 
black as iris of eyes and eye-brows; hair behind 
indicated as elevated surface, probabiy also 
painted black but all traces of paint are effaced; 
face and neck painted red; head and helmet made 
in one piece; helmet without cheek-pieces, with 
straight top, broken off; plain ears, in the left 
one fragment of pierced bronze ring, the right 
one with earring of terracotta of which also 
only a fragment is preserved. Brown clay; traces 
of wheel inside, but the facial features modelled 
by hand. (For the probable connexion of this 
head with the torso No. 1843, cf. pp. 35 f.). Height 
18.5 cm. (Fig. 17). 

Suppl. No. 2794. Fragment of head of statue, 
with the face fairly well preserved. The face 
is quite similar to those of Nos. 1 + 1618+ 
1619 and 1728+1740. Only small fragments of 
eyelids preserved but traces of them are visible 
all round the eye-balls; double-spiral incised 
below mouth; ear-rings of terracotta in the 
fairly carefully modelled ears; pointed beard, 
with converging, longitudinal grooves; end of 
beard missing; fragments of conical helmet; 
traces of black paint on beard. Red-brown clay; 
l»^own slip. Traces of wheel inside, but facial 
features made by hand. Height 20.2 cm. (Fig. 18). 
Suppl. No. 2795. Statuette composed of six 
fragments with joints at neck, waist, lower right 
arm, beneath hips and at ankles; Standing on 
rectangular plaque with the left leg somewhat 
advanced; feet wearing shoes; tubulär legs with 
tibia and knees indicated; narrow waist; some- 
wfaat bulging ehest; broad shoulders; arms 
vertical, stuck to body; plain hands; narrow. 

trapezoid face; plain, pointed beard; incised 
mouth; almost straight nose; prominent cheeks; 
long, lancet-shaped eye-balls and ridged brows; 
peUet ears; conical helmet with top falling along 
the back of head and neck; dressed in a jerkin, 
probabiy of leather, with short sleeves and a 
tunic with overlapping flaps, held by a plain 
band in relief around the waist indicating a 
girdle. Red-brown clay and slip. Hand-made. 
Height 34.5 cm. (Fig. 19). 

No. 1071 (op. cit. p. 708). Upper part of right 
arm and adjoining part of body added; lower 
part of body added and in part restored in 
plaster (Fig. 20). 

No. 1843 (op. cit. p. 743). Added vertical arms 
with slightly curved fingers and advanced thumb; 
erect collar ending the leather jerkin in front 
and at the back of neck; the head (cf. below) 
was attached separately. The jerkin was provided 
with side-flaps; no girdle indicated plastically but 
probabiy in paint now effaced; beneath this 
supposed girdle vertical folds grooved. Back- 
hole. Red-brown clay; jerkin covered with a 
light slip; arms and hands painted in red; part 
of fingers and thumb of right hand missing as 
well as part of fingers of left hand. Hand-made; 
upper part of body and neck-collar built up of 
superimposed Strips. Height 42.0 cm. (Fig. 21; 
Fig. 22 shows the statue with the head, No. 1726, 
probabiy belonging to it; cf. pp. 35 f.). 


No. 1748+2053 (op. cit. pp. 739, 751). The head, 
No. 2053, has been joined to the torso, No. 1748. 
Added lower part of left arm. Red-brown clay; 
brown slip. Lower part of body wheel-made; 
upper part hand-made; head attached separately. 
Traces of black paint on hair and red on face. 
Height 35,0 cm. (Fig. 23). 

No. 1098 (op. cit. p. 710)+Suppl. No. 2796. 
Body with two holes, one on each side near the 
base; lower part of body wheel-made; upper 
part hand-made, in the Strip technique. Added 
part of head (Suppl. No. 2796), in part restored 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Figs. 17—22. Sculptures of the First Proto- 
Cypriote Style. 

Fig. 18. Head, Suppl.No. 2794, front view (a) and pro- 

Fig. 17. Head. No. 1726. 

Digitized by 

Fig. 19. Statuette, Suppl.No. 2795. 
Fig. 20. Statuette, No. 1071. 

Fig. 21. Torso of statue, No. 1843. 

Fig. 22. Torso of statue, No. 1843, with the head, 
No. 1726, added. 

Digitized by 

Fig. 24. Statuette, No. 1098+Suppl.No. 2796, front 
view (a) and profile (b). 

Fig. 23. Statuette, No. 1748+2053. 

Fig. 25. Head, Suppl.No. 2797. 

Digitized by 


Figs. 23— 27. Sculptures of the Second Proto 
Cypriote Style. 

Fig. 27. Head, Suppl.No. 2798. 

Fig. 26. Statuette, No. 1276. 

Digitized by 

Fig. 28. Statuette, No. 1049-{- 1054 + I325+Suppl.No. 


in piaster, made in the same mould as the head 
of Nos. 936, 1724 and 1725 {pp. dt. PI. CCIX 
1 - 4, 6); pendants in the ears. Right eye, righ 
and central parts of forehead and top of hea< 
missing. Black paint on hair, ears, and pendants 
Red-brown clay; buff grey-yellow slip. Heigh 
48.0 cm. (Fig. 24). 

Suppl. No. 2797. Head of Statuette as that o 
No. 1 141 {op. dt. PI. CCXII: 3, 6, 7); around th. 
neck a string with a pendant indicating a woman 
beneath the pendant horizontally grooved fold 
of the dress; small part of hair with vertica 
narrow incisions visible beneath flat band ar 
ound the head; traces of black paint on the haii 
and the eye-brows. Red-brown, hard clay an< 
light slip. Moulded. Height 15.0 cm. (Fig. 25) 
No. 1276 (op. dt. p. 717). Added end of bearc 
with traces of the periphery of a round shield 
there are also traces of the shieid on the right 
upper arm; from these traces the diameter ol 
the shield can be estimated at c. 8.0 cm.; the 
left hand of the figure has apparently seized the 
handle of the shield; the right hand has prob- 
ably had a spear of which there are traces in 
front beneath the strap in which the sword is 
hanging below the left arm. For the hole cut on 
top of the head mentioned in the excavation 
report, cf. p. 37. Red-brown clay and slip. 
Lower part of body wheei-made; ehest hand- 
made; face moulded. Height 35.5 cm. (Fig. 26). 
Suppl. No. 2798. Head of life-size Statue; face 
of trapezoidal shape with long beard tapering 
towards the straight-cut end, its hair indicated 
by small, dose incisions, and continuing along 
the cheeks; protruding lips damaged; nose with 
somewhat uptumed tip; bow-shaped, large eyes; 
eye-brows with narrow, vertical incisions; small 
part of hair with narrow, vertical indsions visible 
beneath remains of helmet or cap; roughly mo- 
delled ears with double earrings; parts missing. 
restored in plaster. Hand-made. Brown, sifted 
clay. Traces of black paint on face; red slip 
on face and helmet. Height 22.0 cm. (Fig. 27). 

Figs. 28—29. Sculptures of Neo-Cypriote Style. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 29, Fragment of head, No, 915, 

No, 1049+1054+1325 (op. cit, pp. 706 f., 719) 
^Suppl. No, 2799, To thc upper part of the 
body, No. 1049, the lower part of the legs, 
No. 1054, the left arm, No. 1325, and the upper 
part of legs and the body below the waist, 
Suppl. No. 2799, have been added. The lower 
part of the legs join to their upper part and the 
body below the waist; that this part of the body 
belongs to the upper part is proved by the fact 
that the dimensions fit exactiy and the clay is 
identical; that the left arm belongs to the 
Statuette is indicated by the fact that the arm is 
marked by a roughly circular groove made when 
the clay was wet and that the same sign is found 
on the left side-flap, these signs evidently made 
by the artist in Order to facilitate the association 
of the arm with the Statuette after the firing, if 
that took place on different occasions or in 
different kilns which seems to have been the 

case to judge by the fact that the clay of the arm 
is more light-coloured than the rest of the Statue; 
this difference in colour was counterbalanced 
with a reddish paint added to the surface of 
the exterior part of the arm while the interior 
part, being dose by the body and not well 
visible, was left unpainted; of the same reddish 
paint there are traces on the rest of the Statuette 
(cf. below). The upper part of body and lower 
parts of legs as described, loc, cit,; the left 
hand is adomed with a circular armlet and holds 
a circular object; the modelling of the lower 
apophysis of the cubit-bone is similar to that 
of the right arm and also the partition of the 
fingers by grooved lines and the careful modell- 
ing of the nail of the thumb are features charac- 
teristic of both arms forming additional evi- 
dence of their association. The part of the 
Chiton on the lower part of the body is provided 
with side-flaps and a plain girdle at the waist; 
below that are grooved pendent folds; the chiton 
ends with a central flap between the thighs, 
proved by a border marked by a grooved line 
and continuing at the sides by vertical grooves 
to the side-flaps; the lower border of the left 
sleeve of the chiton is marked by clear traces 
and has been restored in piaster corresponding 
to the preserved border of the right arm; there 
are faint traces of black colour on the hair and 
on the brows and of a reddish colour both on 
the chiton where it may have formed a pattem 
and on the naked parts of the body, e. g. on the 
feet and on the ears. Height 98.0 cm. (Fig. 28). 
No, 915 (op, cit, p. 701). Not illustrated in 
op, cit, (Fig. 29). 

No, 2502 (op, cit, p. 767). The parts described as 
missing in loc, cit, have been restored in piaster. 
The following details may be added to the 
description given in loc, cit, The chin is pointed; 
lips protruding and a concave modelling around 
the mouth emphasizes these features; traces of 
red upper border of the chiton in front and also 
of band decorated with ladder-pattem along 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 36 a. Head, No. 2469. 

Fig. 34. Statuette, No. 2497 + 2477 2478, profilc (a) 
and front view (b). 

Figs. 30 — 38. Sculptures of Cypro-Greek Style 

Fig. 35 a. Statuette, No. 2467 +Suppl.No. 2802 

Fig. 30 b. Profile of head, 
No. 2502. 

Fig. 36 b. Profile of 
head, No. 2469. 

Fig. 32 b. Profile of Fig. 35 b. Profile of 
head, No. 2456. head, No. 2467. 

Digitized by CjOOQIc 

Fig, 37. Statuette t No. 2434"^Suppl.No. 2803, front 
view (a), profile (b). 

Fig. 38. Statuette, No. 2446+2448. 

left side of body; ears and naked parts of arms 
with traces of red colour; traces of black colour 
on the hair which falls in a compact mass on 
thc back of head, with slightly concavc sides. 
Lower part of body wheel-made; upper part 
hand-made; head with traces of wheel inside, 
but facial features hand-made (Fig. 30). 

No. 2169+1603+2475 (op. cit. pp. 733, 755, 766). 
Added to the head, No. 2169, a fragment of the 
body, with the left arm, No. 1603, and the right 
arm with part of the body, No. 2475. The body 
is restored in plaster below. Lower part of body 
tubulär, wheel-made; upper part is flattened with 
broad, sloping shoulders and built up by Strips; 
arms vertical with closed hand; of fingers only 
thumb modelled; part of right thumb and of 
left hand missing. Brown clay; light-brown slip. 
Lower part of body wheel-made; upper part 


built up of superimposed Strips as also the head. 
Height 49.0 cm. (Fig. 31) 

No. 2456 (op. cit. p. 765)+5i^p/. No. 2800. To 
the Statuette as described in loc. cit.j the right 
arm and lower part of left arm have been added 
as well as small parts of the body, Suppl. No. 
2800; parts of the body below restored in plaster; 
dressed in a chiton with short sleeves indicated 
by shallow, grooved line on upper part of arms; 
below that the muscles of the arm roughly in- 
dicated by a concavity. Brown clay; buff-grey 
slip. Lower part of body wheel-made; upper 
part built up of superimposed Strips as also the 
head. Height 53.0 cm., part added in plaster not 
included (Fig. 32). 

No. 2462 (op. cit. p. 76S)+Suppl. No. 2801. To 
the head, No 2462, described in loc. cit. the rest 
of the Statuette has been added from fragments, 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Suppl. No. 2801. Figure Standing on a base 
tablet with almost isolinear feet, but left foot 
slightly advanced; feet with pointed shoes; 
ankles well indicated; lower part of body tubu- 
lär, wheel-made; upper part is built up by 
Strips; female breasts and pellet nipples indicated; 
broad, sloping shoulders; vertical arms with 
closed hand; of the fingers only thumb modelled 
and nail indicated; dress with short sleeves 
indicated by ridges across upper arms; in front 
the dress ends somewhat above the instep; at the 
back it falls with side-flaps widening towards the 
ground and ending only a little above it; chin 
with an impressed dimple; traces of black lines 
indicating eyelids. Lower part of right arm and 
part of hand of left arm missing; parts of body 
restored in plaster. Brown clay; buff grey and 
grey-brown slip. Lower part of body wheel-made; 
upper part hand-made, built up of strips as also 
the head. Height 71.5 cm. (Fig. 33). 

No. 2497+2477+2478 (op. dt. p. 766). The 
arms, Nos. 2477 and 2478, have been added to 
the bust, No 2497. Two fingers of the right hand 
and part of all the fingers of the left hand are 
missing; lower part of body restored in plaster. 
Traces of red paint on arms. Baking holes in 
arms, back of body and back of head. Lower 
part of body probably tubulär and wheel-made; 
upper part hand-made, built up of strips; head 
added separately and inside with traces of wheel, 
but features of face modelled by hand; helmet, 
with remains of ridged crest, added separately. 
Red-brown clay; buff-white slip; red paint on 
face. Height 51.0 cm. (Fig. 34). 

No. 2467 {op. dt. p. 165)+Suppl. No. 2802. Two 
pieces of the right part of the bust have been 
added (Suppl. No. 2802). The preserved part of 
the bust and the head hand-made, in the Strip 
technique. Dress painted with a reddish colour 
on which converging black lines and deep-red 
bands. Brown clay. Height 26.0 cm. (Fig. 35). 
No. 2469 (op. dt. p. 766). Head of Statuette. Four 
small pieces have been added to the part de- 
scribcd in loc. dt.: face of trapezoidal shape 
with pointed chin; protruding, smiling lips; 

concave part around mouth; prominent, straight 
and thin nose; bulging, almond-shaped eye- 
balls; ridged brows; roughly shaped, plain ears 
with double earrings; helmet or cap; neck bclow 
and right part of cap and small part at right 
temple restored in plaster. Brown clay; light buff- 
grey slip. Lower part wheel-made; upper part 
hand-made; features of face modelled by hand. 
Height 18.0 cm. (Fig. 36). 

No. 2434 {op. dt. p. lfA)+Suppl. No. 2803. 
Fragments of the head, Suppl. No. 2803, have 
been added to the body, No. 2434. Lower part 
of body tubulär, wheel-made; upper part flattened 
and hand-made; broad, sloping shoulders; verti- 
cal arms; hands closed with modelled fingers and 
straight thumb; long, tapering neck; almost tri- 
angulär face; pointed chin; smiling, full lips; 
concave part around mouth; curved, thin nose; 
prominent, almond-shaped eyes; roughly shaped 
ears with double earrings; helmet or cap; hair 
falling at back of head and neck in a compact 
mass. Red-brown clay; light slip. Traces of wheel 
inside, but features of face hand-made. Height 
67.5 cm. (Fig. 37). 

No. 2446+2448 {op. dt. p. 765). Missing parts 
restored in plaster. This figure is a repräsentative 
of the Cypro-Greek style in the idol Version, 
corresponding to the large idols related to 
Proto-Cypriote and Neo-Cypriote styles (cf. p. 
37). Brown clay; light yellow slip. Hand-made 
(Fig. 38). 

Type 1 

Suppl. No. 2804. Female idol; cylindrical body 
splaying towards the plain base; breasts indicated 
by conical projections; arms uplifted; face 
roughly triangulär with rounded chin; incised 
mouth; thick nose; circular pellet eyes; thick 
brows; flat, rectangular hair-dress, covered with 
black paint in front, hair indicated by vertical 
black lines behind; encircling black lines on 
body. Part of nose, of left arm and of body 
missing. Light-brown clay. Body wheel-made. 
Height 10.5 cm. (Fig. 39). 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Figs. 39—41. Small Human Idols. 

Fig. 39. Female idol, No. 2804, front (a) and back- 
side (b). 

Fig. 41. Statuette, No. 1421, profile (a), front view (b). 

Digitized by 

Type 3 

Siq>pL No. 2805. Statuette with tubulär body; 
splayed base; arms once attached on shoulder 
but now missing; head of triangulär shape; 
roughly shaped nose; large pellet eyes; heavy 
brows; narrow, tall helmet, similar to Nos. 1503, 
1994, 2363. Red-brown clay and slip. Wheel- 
made. Height 29.3 cm. (Fig. 40). 

Type 7 

No. 1421 {pp. dt. p. 733). In the second diagram, 
op. cit. foUowing p. 812, this Statuette has been 
crroneously classified as ”Large human idol”. 
It belongs instead to the category of ”Small 
human idols”, Type 7 {op. dt. p. 788), i.e. idols 
with moulded heads, similar to those of the 
statuettes illustrated in op. dt. PI. CCXXXII: 
6-8. Red-brown clay and light yellow slip. 
Body wheel-made; face moulded (Fig. 41). 

Type 1 

No. 2316 {op. dt. p. 759). Added: upper part of 
both arms (Fig. 42). 

No. 2372 {op. dt. p. 762). Added: lower part of 
left arm; base restored in plaster (Fig. 43). 
Type 2—3 

No. 3+1773 {op. dt. pp. 675, 740). Head, No. 3, 
added to body No. 1773. Lower part of body 
wheel-made, upper part hand-made. Brown clay; 
buff, light-brown slip. Height 62.5 cm. (Fig. 44). 
Type 3 

No. 1017 (op. cit. p. 704)+5i(Rp/. No.2806.TYic 
Upper part of body, arms, and head, Suppl. No. 
2806, have been added to the lower part of body, 
No. 1017. Lower part of body wheel-made, 
upper part hand-made; head wheel-made but 
features of face modelled by hand. Body elliptical 
in section; flattened ehest; sloping shoulders; 
vertical arms with closed hand; modelled fingers, 
straight thumb; long cylindrical neck; head trape- 
zoidal; pointed beard; incised mouth; thin nose; 
slightly elevated eye-balls; ridged brows; roughly 
shaped ears with earrings; hair in compact mass 
falling at the back of neck; conical helmet of 
which upper part missing. Back-hole. Dark-grey 

to brown clay; greenish-yellow to buff grey slip. 
Height 67.0 cm. (Fig. 45). 

No. 1065 {op. dt. p. 708). Added: right arm 
(Fig. 46). 

No. 1143 {op. dt. pp. 712 f.). Added: left arm 
(Fig. 47). 

No. 1643 {op. dt. p. 734). Added: lower part of 
left arm; part of both hands missing (Fig. 48). 
No. 1980 {op. dt. p. 747). Not illustrated in 
op. dt. (Fig. 49). 

Type 4 

No. 1021 {op. dt. pp. 704 f.). Not illustrated in 
op. dt. (Fig. 50). 

No. 909 {op. dt. p. 700). Not illustrated in 
op. dt. (Fig. 51). 


Lateral part of throne 
No. 2331 {op. dt. p. 760). Top of Banking side 
of throne reconstructed in plaster; not illustrated 
in op. dt. (Fig. 52). 


Suppl. No. 2807. Four peripherical leaves and 
one central leaf, probably offered by votaries. 
Two specimens. Length 7.3 and 7.8 cm. Found 
in D 4 (Fig. 53). 


Suppl. No. 2808. Spirally wound thunderbolts, 
four complete specimens and two fragments, 
one with preserved alternately red and black 
painted bands. One thunderbolt with bent shaft- 
hole and incised lines between ridges of the 
spiral windings and on the part of the thunder- 
bolt between the windings and the shaft-hole. 
Found in K-L 11. Length 16.0—19.3 cm. 
(Fig. 54). 


Detail of ear of No. 1356 {op. dt. p. 720), show- 
ing ear pierced by four holes (Fig. 55). 


Suppl. No. 2810. Vase in the shape of an astra- 
galos; neck broken off; fragment of handle from 
body to neck. Found in E 9. Brown clay; buff- 
yellow slip. Length 8.5 cm. (Fig. 56). 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Figs. 42—51. Large Hurrtan Idols. 

Fig, 42, Bisexual idoL 
No. 2316. 

Fig. 45. Statuette, No. 
(a), front view (b). 


Fig. 44. Statuette, No.3+1773, profile (a), front 
view (b). 

Digitized by 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Remarks and conclusioiis 

The amphora, No. 2414, was in the excavation 
report (pp. dt. p. 763) classified as White 
Painted IV— V. Such a Classification is still 
warranted. Contact with Type IV is shown by 
the fairly similar shape of the Bichrome Red I 
(IV) amphora, op. dt. IV:2, Fig. XLII:7, but 
the amphora No. 2414 has a drooping rim and 
an angular biconical body, characteristic fea- 
tures of Type V, whereas the rim of the Bi- 
chrome Red I (IV) is flat and its body rounded 
biconical. The parts added to the body of the 
amphora No. 2414, as a result of the mending 
Work, have increased the stylistic tendencies of 
Type V by the fact that the shape of the body 
can be proved to be angular-biconical. A date 
of about the middle of the 6th Century B.C. is 
indicated on ceramic evidence and this is con- 
firmed by the style of the female figurines 
attached to the handles. Their moulded heads 
indicate the initial phase of the Neo-Cypriote 
style. We know that the stylistic features of the 
Proto-Cypriote faces were transformed and 
modified in the Neo-Cypriote style, which tends 
towards a canonic form, with less individual 
variations than before; the modelling is smooth 
and shallow, no details are accentuated, and 
the different parts of the face merge softly into 
one another. The transition between the last 
phase of the Second Proto-Cypriote and the 
initial phase of the Neo-Cypriote style is gradual 
and these phases of the two styles are in fact 
Contemporary as shown by the find-contexts’. 
On the other hand the difference between the 
latest specimens of the Second Proto-Cypriote 
style and the earliest representatives of the Neo- 
Cypriote style is equally clear; it is instructive 
to compare the faces of the Neo-Cypriote 
figurines here in question with those of the 
Second Proto-Cypriote style illustrated in op. 

’ Op. dt. pp. 208 f.: the Second Proto-Cypriote style 
lasted from c. 600 to 540 B.C. and the Neo-Cypriote style 
from c. 560 to 520 B.C. 


dt. II, PI. CCIX: the softly modelled faces of the 
Neo-Cypriote figurines, with the flabby cheeks, 
fleshy, round chin, full lips and narrow, leaf- 
shaped eyes contrast with the firmer structure of 
the Second Proto-Cypriote faces, with their 
wide, leaf-shaped or semi-lunar eyes and thia, 
straight lips. 

As mentioned above (p. 4), the initial date 
of the Neo-Cypriote style is c. 560 B.C. and the 
chronological evidence given by the style of the 
amphora, c. 550 B. C., is thus confirmed by its 
sculptural adomment. 

The capacity of the amphora can be calculated 
to have been between c. 38 and 41 1., the neck 
not included. The incised signs indicate the 
capacity of the contents, not the amphora itself, 
as there is nothing to show that this amphora 
served as a Standard measure. What we know 
about the System of capacity of ancient Cyprus 
is very little and refers to late antiquity*. No 
doubt the Cypriote System of capacity formed 
part of those of Egypt and the Near East during 
the Archaic period when the Cypriote cultural 
relations were intimate with these regions of the 
Mediterranean*. The basic unit has therefore 
most probably been equivalent to the Egyptian 
Hin, the Phoenician-Hebrew Log, the Babylo- 
nian Ka, and to the Creek xestes (dikotylon). 
derived from this Oriental system of capacity^*, 
and if we identify this basic unit with that 
indicated by each single stroke, the higher unit 
of measure indicated by the Z-shaped sign must 
have been the Cypriote measure of capacity 
equivalent to the Creek hemiamphorion, be- 
cause the measure equivalent to a metretes 
would have resulted in a capacity very much 
exceeding that of the amphora, and a unit minor 
to that of a hemiamphorion would result in a 
capacity much too small for that of the amphora: 


® A survey of the litcrary evidence is given by Sakjel- 
LARios, Ta KoKpiaxct I, pp. 634 ff. 

• Swed. Cyp. Exp. IV:2, pp. 226 ff. 

ViEDEBANTT, Forschungen zur Metrol. d. Ahert 
(Abh. phil.-hist. Kl. Königl. Sächs. Ges. Wiss. XXXIV. 
No. III. 1917), pp. 49. 60. 129, 131, 159 f. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

it would be natural if the total measure indicated 
would have been somewhat, but not much, 
smaller than the capacity of the amphora. 
8 units equivalent to the xestes and 3 units 
equivalent to the hemiamphorion would yield a 
total amount of between 36 and 37 1., a total 
amount, which considering the approximate 
exactitude of the measures used and local 
differences prevailing, agrees well with both the 
capacity of the amphora and the probable 
System of capacity used in Cyprus during the 
Archaic period. 

Tuming now to the scolptures we may first 
emphasize the fact that several sculptures have 
had their artistic value considerably increased 
by the restoration work. A bull Statuette without 
legs and homs is a miserable sight; from an 
aesthetic point of view the look of the Late 
Cypriote m bull Statuette, Fig. 2, has improved 
very much by the restoration of its homs and 
legs and the same holds good for the Cypro- 
Geometric (Figs. 3, 4) and Cypro- Archaic (Fig. 6) 
statnettes. If the reader is interested in the matter, 
she or he may compare Figs. 2—4, 6 with op. cit, 
Pis. CCXXIV:!, 2; CCXXV:1, 3, 6 to see the 
difference between the present and earlier 
appearance of these bull statuettes. 

The bull Statuette, Fig. 5, represents a new 
type or rather a variety of Type 4 (p. 7): the 
head is similar to those of Type 4, of Cypro- 
Geomctric I— II, but the body put together from 
sherds is barrel-shaped, similar to that of No. 
2315 (pp. cit. PL CCXXV:5) dating from Cypro- 
Archaic period. The bull Statuette, Fig. 5, thus 
forms an intermediate specimen between the 
Cypro-Geometric I— II and the Cypro- Archaic I 
bull statuettes and would therefore probably 
date from Cypro-Geometric III. Such a date 
cannot be proved, nor is it contradicted by the 
find-contexts; the head and fragments of the 
body were all found in the lower foundation 
deposit around the altar erected at the beginning 
of the local Period 3, i. e. about the middle of 
Cypro-Geometric III; when this new altar was 
erected, ex votos originally placed around the 

earlier altar, which was in use from the be- 
ginning of Cypro-Geometric I to the middle of 
Cypro-Geometric III, were deposited around the 
new altar. The bull Statuette in question forming 
part of the ex votos removed from the earlier 
to the new altar and being typologically more 
advanced than the Cypro-Geometric I— II 
statuettes would thus probably date from the 
early half of Cypro-Geometric III. 

The minotaur Statuette, Fig. 7, has been re- 
published on account of the fact that its de- 
scription in the excavation report needs some 
correction in details and also because the animal 
part of the figure is not illustrated in that report 
(op. CiL PI. CCXXVII:6), although it is de- 
scribed in the Object Register of the report (op. 
cit. p. 740, No. 1775). Why only the human part 
of this minotaur was illustrated in the excavation 
report 1 am unable to explain and it is of very 
little interest, if any at all. Of greater interest is 
another fact, viz. that this minotaur Statuette is 
similar to that of No. 2031+2361 (op. cit. PI. 
CCXXVIIrl): the same shape of the head, the 
cylindrical human body with sharply marked 
top, the female breasts in profile beneath the 
arms. For typological reasons one would not 
date these two statuettes very far from each 
other. In view of that, it is interesting to examine 
their find-contexts: the Statuette No. 1775 was 
found on the floor of the local Period 4, laid at 
about the middle of Cypro-Archaic I (p. 4, n. 6) 
and of the stauette No. 2031+2361, No. 2031 was 
found in the lower foundation deposit of the 
new altar (cf. p. 3) and No. 2361 in the waste 
deposit in Square K 6 on the floor of the local 
Period 4. An explanation of the seemingly con- 
flicting find-contexts of the latter Statuette has 
been given in the excavation report (op. cit. pp. 
807 f.). Notwithstanding whether that explana- 
tion is accepted or not we must accept the find- 
context of No. 2031 as indicating the date of the 
Statuette which thus cannot be later than the 
end of the local Period 2, i. e. about the middle 
of Cypro-Geometric III or c. 775 B.C. As regards 
the date of No. 1775 the fact that it was found 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

on the floor of the local Period 4 may be con- 
sidered to indicate that it is assignable to the 
time when that floor was in use, i. e. from the 
middle of Cypro-Archaic I to the early phase of 
Cypro-Archaic II, or in absolute figures c. 
650— 560 B.C. (p. 4, n. 6), but there is evidence 
that several ex votos which originally had been 
placed on the floor of the local Period 3 were 
removed to the floor of the local Period 4 when 
the sanctuary of that period was constructed (op* 
cit. pp. 804 ff.). The local Period 3 dates from 
the middle of Cypro-Geometric III to the 
middle of Cypro-Archaic I, i.e. it covers the 
time between c. 775 and 650 B.C. (pp. 3, 4, n. 6» 
33). Thus it may happen that some objects found 
on the floor of the local Period 4 are as early as 
c. 775 B.C. and that may therefore be the date of 
No. 1775, which would bring it chronologically 
near the Statuette No. 2031+2361. As empha- 
sized already in the excavation report {op. cit. 
pp. 804 ff.), ”stratigraphy, like all methods, is 
one which must be used with discretion”. The 
stratigraphical method can be misused if applied 
mechanically. The actual case illustrates that 
fact and shows that the typological and stylistic 
criteria should not be overlooked. 

No complete group of dancers was represented 
among those available at the time when the 
excavation report was published. The three 
groups so far discovered at Ajia Irini are all of 
different composition; one, No. 123 (op. cit. PI. 
CCXXIII:6), consists of three ring dancers and 
one central iigurine, probably the musician; the 
figurines, as far as preserved (the central figurine, 
one of the dancers and part of a second dancer) 
are female; the second group, No. 1169 {op. cit. 
p. 714), consists of two pair-dancers (not ring 
dancers as stated in loc. cit.); of three figurines 
the heads and parts of some of their arms are 
missing and the whole upper part of one of the 
fourth figurine is missing; the pairs are Standing 
facing each other; on the two figurines of the 
one side so much of the beard is preserved that 
they can be identified as male; probably the 
opposite pair was female, although indisputable 


female indications are missing; one figurine has 
however, the neck preserved up to the chii 
without any trace of beard. The third group 
here illustrated in its restored condition, Fig. 1( 
(No. 1693+2083), consists of four ring dancers 
two female and two male, the dancers of diifereni 
sex facing each other, and a fifth figurine, the 
musician, in the centre. The three groups ol 
dancers thus represent female ring dancers. 
ring dancers of both sexes, and pair dancers. 
The groups of ring dancers are attached to a 
circular base, those of the pair dancers to a 
roughly trapezoidal base. The groups of ring 
dancers are provided with a central figurine 
acting as a musician'^ 

Statuettes of riders are not particularly com- 
mon among the finds from Ajia Irini. So far 
only three specimens are known and they are 
all of a small size (Nos. 921, 922, 1366; op. cit. 
pp. 701, 721; PI. CCXXIV:!). The fragmentary 
Statuette here illustrated, Fig. 8, is interesting 
as the only specimen of a rider of a larger size 
and of a more elaborate, though still conven- 
tionalized modelling, of the same type as repre- 
sented at Idalion (op. cit. PI. CLXXXIIilO) and 

Some of the chariols have been restored in 
details (Figs. 9—11), others have been put to- 
gether from various fragments (Figs. 12—15). 
Artistically they ränge from fairly well modelled 
specimens with details of wheels, horse-trappings 
etc. minutely indicated and the heads of the 
charioteer and warrior made in moulds of the 
Second Proto-Cypriote style (Figs. 9, 10), via 
specimens with particulars less carefullyexecuted 
and with the human figiuines made in the 
”snow-man” technique (Figs. 11 — 13) to fairly 
roughly and sununarily shaped specimens (Figs. 
14, 15); in Figs. 11 — 13 the wheels are plain, the 
horses and horse-trappings are modelled in 

Similar groups of ring dancers are Ulustrated in Ohne- 
FALSCH-RiCHTER, K.B.H. PI. CXXVII:5 (three female ring 
dancers and a female flute player), 6 (ring dancers of both 
sexes and tambourine players). Pzir dancers seem to be 
less commonly represented in sculpture. I do not remem- 
ber of any other specimen than that mentioned here. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

a diagrammatic manner and in Fig. 14 there are 
no wheels at all but only an axis projecting from 
the flanks of the chariot; in Fig. 15, finally, the 
chariot rests directly on the ground and huge 
plain wheels were attached to the flanks of the 
chariot, the top of which was below the hubs 
of the wheels, which are therefore without 
functional connection with the chariot. 

Of particular technical interest is the evidence 
givcn by some of these statuettes for the con- 
stniction of the coach-body of the chariot. The 
oval, rounded shape of Fig. 14, the somewhat 
concave front and flanks of Fig. 11, the concave 
front and slightly curved flanks of Figs. 12 and 
13, the latter coach-body with dome-shaped 
excisions both in the front and the flanks, all 
these characteristics seem to indicate a con- 
stniction of bendable wood and plaited work for 
the coach-bodies mentioned and that connects 
them technically with the Homeric xafjmvXov 
or kyxvXov Another type represented 

among the chariots found at Ajia Irini is that 
with straight front and flanks. That such a type 
seems to be represented in Fig. 15 is not con- 
clusive owing to the rough and summary 
modelling of this chariot, but the fact that this 
type is also represented by Figs. 9 and 10 must 
be considered to prove the case in view of the 
careful modelling of these chariots. Both types 
are of Oriental derivations, the first type con- 
nected with the light Egyptian chariot and the 
second type with the more heavy Assyrian 

In connection with the chariots some words 
may be said on the arms and armoor represented 
by the Ajia Irini sculptures. About helmets, 
shields, swords, and arrows there are sufficient 
notes published already in the excavation report, 
but some remarks may here be added on one 

“Homer, //. V, 231; VI, 39. 

“ For th^ types of chariots, cf. Nuoffer, Der Renn- 
wagen im Altertum, Diss. Leipzig 1904; Mercklin, Der 
Rennwagen in Griechenland, Diss. Leipzig 1909; Nachod, 
Der Rennwagen bei den Italikern, Diss. Leipzig 1909; 
Lorimer, Homer and the Monum., pp. 307 ff.; Wace- 
Stubbings, A Companion to Homer, pp. 521 f., 540 f. 

offensive weapon, the spear, and one defensive, 
the leather cuirass, both illustrated by the 
sculptures here considered. Fig. 26 (No. 1276) 
shows a warrior of the Second Proto-Cypriote 
style, wearing a sword, a shield and a spear of 
which there are traces, as it seems, in front 
below the strap of the sword; the spear, if this 
interpretation is right, has been held by the hand 
of the right lifted arm. On a sculpture of small 
size as that of Fig. 26 (No. 1276), the spear 
could easily be of terracotta, but on sculptures 
of larger size this could hardly have been the 
case on account of the excessive fragility of a 
long spear of terracotta; it is therefore likely 
that the spears of the warrior statues of large 
size were of wood. There are some sculptures 
showing the right hand in such a Position that 
it may be supposed to have held a spear, e.g. 
Nos. 1385+1530 (op. ciL PI. CXCIV:2), 1070+ 
1072+1073+1075, 1189 {pp. cit. pp. 708, 715). 
For the helmet (now missing) of this figure, see 
p. 37. 

A leather jerkin provided with a neck-coUar 
is wom by Fig. 21 (No. 1843). The head of this 
torso, as mentioned in the description (p. 15) 
was joined separately and was probably that of 
Fig. 17 (No. 1726). The joining part is missing, 
but the head was found only 0.45 m. from the 
torso and on the same level (both in Square K 8, 
at a level of 94.4, resp. 94.9), the dimensions of 
the head fit to those of the torso, the clay is the 
same, both belong to the First Proto-Cypriote 
style, and no other head without association 
with a body and of dimensions fitting the torso 
in question was found in Square K 8. Fig. 22 is 
intended to show the reader how this statue may 
have looked originally and, if the head against 
all probability does not belong, the Impression 
of the reconstruction must still be principally 
right, since the head must be that of a warrior 
assignable to the first Proto-Cypriote style. The 
neck-coUar of the leather jerkin is unique, but a 
jerkin of that material is also clearly represented 
on other sculptures, although not pointed out in 
the excavation report. Thus the jerkins of e.g. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Nos. 2106+2103 (op. dt. PL CXQ and 1728+ 
1740 {op. dt. PL CXCI:2, 3) arc clearly indicated 
to havc bccn of leather as shown by thcir stiff 
contour, ridged seams, and the widening 
openings of the sleeves in Order to enable an 
easier movement of the arms. Jerkins of leather 
(and sometimes also of linen) were in use, as we 
know, in Egypt and the Near EasP^ and similar 
leather jerkins are also known from Grcece“. 
The Oriental corslets were sometimes provided 
with a coUar, although there is no exact parallel 
to the Cypriote specimen here in question^*. 
For the time being I must limit myself to the 
Observation that the Ajia Irini sculptures prove 
the existence of leather jerkins in the Archaic 
period and that these jerkins sometimes were 
provided with that particular neck-cover shown 
by Fig. 22. I wish, however, to point out that a 
study of the Cypriote sculptures, both those 
found at Ajia Irini and elsewhere, will show 
many varieties of the jerkins or corslets^L Such 
a general study of Cypriote armour is out of 
place here and must be postponed to a later 

Apart from the torso and head just discussed 
the most interesting specimen of the First Proto- 
Cypriote style obtained by the restoration work 
is the head, Fig. 18 (No. 2794). The general 
shape of this head, the eyes, nose, mouth, and 
beard are so closely similar to those of Nos. 
1 + 1618+1619 {op. dt. PL CXCI:1) and 1728+ 
1740 {op. dt. PL CXCI:2, 3) that these sculptures 
must have been made by the same artist: the 
only detail distinguishing No. 2794 from the 

“ Bonnet, Die Waffen der Völker d. alt. Orients, pp. 
209 ff.; Lorimer, op. dt., pp. 1% ff. For Cypriote lamellar 
armours and their Oriental Connections, see Swed. Cyp. 
Exp. IV:2, pp. 379 f. 

” Lorimer, op. dt. pp. 134, 153, 1% ff. 

Bonnet, op. dt. p. 213, Fig. 106; Lorimer, op. dt. 
p. 198, Figs. 16, 17. 

Just one example; the armour of e.g. op. dt. U, Pis. 
CXa:l, CXaV:2, CXCVUI, CC:1, 2etc. with the leath- 
er jerkin endlng at the waist and the chiton appearing 
below that around the hips and upper part of thighs have 
striking parallels in the equipment of the soldiers on the 
warrior Stele from Mycenae and on the warrior vase from 
that place (cf. Lorimer, op. dt. Pis. II, 2; III, la, b.). 


two others is the incised double spiral indicating 
the part of the beard below the mouth, whereas 
that part of the beard is indicated by a small 
protuberance on the other two sculptures 
mentioned. No. 2106+2103 {op. dt. CXC, 
CXCIIil) has perhaps not been made by the 
same artist as the sculptures mentioned but by 
a member of the same school of art and the 
relief double spiral indicating a hair lock below 
the helmet of No. 2106+2103 is a characteristic 
detail associating this sculpture with No. 2794, 
with its incised double spiral of a hair tuft 
below the mouth. 

Fig. 19, No. 2795, is unique among the Ajia 
Irini sculptures in that it represents a small-sized 
figure made in the manner of the large sculptures. 
It has its nearest parallels in the later group of 
the First Proto-Cypriote style corresponding to 
the local style II at Ajia Irini (p. 4, n. 4), as shown 
by a comparison with one of the leading sculp- 
tures of that style, No. 1763+1845 {op. cit. PI. 
CXCVIII): as the helmet of this statue is missing 
we do not know how far it was similar to that 
of No. 2795, but the tubulär legs, the narrow 
waist, the shape of the head, nose, and beard, 
etc. are quite similar. 

Proceeding now to the sculptures of the 
Second Proto-Cypriote style we may first point 
out that the figure, Fig. 23 (No. 1748+2053), 
represents a group of sculptures forming an 
intermediate stage between the idol plastic and 
the art sculpture (p. 4, n. 3). 

The head, Fig. 27 (No. 2798), belongs to a 
life-size statue and was modelled entirely by 
hand. It has no exact parallel among the other 
Ajia Irini sculptures of the Second Proto- 
Cyptriote style but several features connect it 
with various representatives of that style: the 
protruding lips correspond to those of e.g. No. 
1767 {op. dt. PL CCVI:5) and No. 2072+2075 
{op. dt. PL CCX), the eyes are similar to those 
of the latter statue but even still more to those 
of No. 2021 {op. dt. PL CCVI:4) with their 
bow-shaped lids; the brows with their narrow, 
vertical incisions and the beard with its hair 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

indicated by small, dose indsions have striking 
paiallels shown by a head in the Metropolitan 
Museum of Art, New York (Cesnola, Atlas II, 
PI. XVn: 129). 

Many heads of the smaller sculptures are cast 
in moulds (Figs. 24— 26). The head of the 
Statuette, Fig. 24 (No. 1098+2796) has many 
parallels among the moulded heads of the local 
Style III at Ajia Irini, e.g. Nos. 936, 1037+2454, 
1724, 1725 {Swed. Cyp. Exp. II PI. CCIX) and the 
head, Fig. 25 (No. 2797) is made in the same 
mould as that of the Statuette No. 1141 {op. dt. 
PI. CCXII:3, 6, 7) belonging to the local Style IV 
at Ajia Irini. The head of the Statuette, Fig. 26 
(No. 1276) mentioned above (p. 20), shows a 
technical peculiarity: on top of the skull there 
is a roughly oval-shaped hole cut when the clay 
was still unbaked; this hole was evidently inten- 
ded for receiving a separately made helmet. The 
moulded face is 20% larger than that of No. 2384 
(op. dt. PI. CCXXXII:15), which is stylistically 
akin to No. 1276 and may represent a second 
"Abformung” of that prototype**. 

The sculptures of the Neo-Cypriote style com- 
prise two spedmens: one fragment of a head, 
Fig. 28 (No. 915) and one entire statue, Fig. 29 
(No. 1054+1325+2799), both artistic products 
of excellent quality. 

The fragment No. 915 shows a strong stylistic 
similarity to the helmeted Neo-Cypriote head 
from Salamis, in fragmentary condition illu- 
strated in Joum. Hell. Stud. XII, 1891, p. 149, 
Fig. 7 and in restored condition in Swed. Cyp. 
Exp. IV:2, PI. IX, below, facing p. 108. The 
eye-brows and helmet of No. 915 are plain, 
whereas the brows of the Salamis head are 
’Teathered” and the helmet decorated with 
circular indsions but otherwise the part pre- 
served of the face of No. 915 is almost identical 
with the corresponding part of the Salamis head. 

The Statue No. 1054+1325+2799 represents 
the Neo-Cypriote Version of the terracotta 
sculptures with modelled legs of which the First 

" Cf. Opusc. arch. II, pp. 1 ff. 

Proto-Cypriote version is represented e.g. by 
Nos. 1 + 1618+1619, 1728+1740 (op. dt. II, PI. 
CXCI), 1385+1530 (op. dt. PI. CXCIV:2), 
1763+1845 (op. dt. PI. CXCVIII), 2102 (op. dt. 
PI. CCII) and the Second Proto-Cypriote version 
by No. 1767 (op. dt. Pis. CCV:1; CCVI:1). 
No. 947 (op. dt. p. 702) forms another instance 
of a similar Neo-Cypriote sculpture with 
modelled legs, uncovered by the dress, but the 
upper part of that statue has not yet been iden- 
tified. It can thus be seen that sculptures with 
modelled legs were fairly rare at Ajia Irini after 
the time of the First Proto-Cypriote style and, 
as shown below, this type of body is, so 
far, altogether without repräsentatives among 
the Ajia Irini sculptures of the Cypro-Greek 
style. The Neo-Cypriote body of the sculpture 
here in question and that of No. 947 diifer in a 
characteristic way from that of the Proto- 
Cypriote style by its slender structure and the 
delicate, subtle rehnement of the details, a 
stylistic feature that is typical of the correspond- 
ing stone sculptures of the Neo-Cypriote style 
(op. dt. IV:2, p. 108). 

Among the sculptures assignable to the 
Archak Cypro-Greek style there are two figures, 
Figs. 37 and 38 (Nos. 2434 and 2446+2448), 
which are intermediate specimens between idol 
plastic and art sculpture, No. 2434 approching 
closer to the category of art sculpture than No. 

The body of the Cypro-Greek sculptures, as 
far as preserved, is tubulär or oval in section 
and there is only one instance, the female 
statue, Fig. 33 (No. 2462+2801), with modelled 
feet wearing pointed shoes protruding below the 
Chiton. There is no evidence of moulds having 
been used for making the faces, which seem 
to have been modelled altogether by hand. The 
moulding technique was apparently not used at 
Ajia Irini by the artists working in the First 
Proto-Cypriote and the Cypro-Greek styles, but 
only by those working in the Second Proto- 
Cypriote and Neo-Cypriote styles (cf. above and 
op. dt. IV:2, pp. 99, 105, 107). The individual 


DigitizecJ by v^ooQle 

traits of the Cypro-Greek sculptures from Ajia 
Irini are very distinct and the characteristics of 
each artist are quite clear. The profile of the 
faces of Figs. 30 (No. 2502) and 36 (No. 2469) 
are exactly similar and also their front views, 
although the face of No. 2469 is broader than 
that of No. 2502. The similarity of the facial 
features is so great that we must suppose that 
these two sculptures were made by the same 
artist. The same holds good for the figures of 
Figs. 32, 33 and 35 (Nos. 2456+2800, 2462+ 
2801, 2467+2802); the thick, fleshy nose, the 
prominent, large eyes, and the protruding lips 
are identical as can be best seen from the profile 
photos of the faces; the base of helmets of the 
nude figures, Figs. 32 and 35 (Nos. 2456+2800 
and 2467+2802), ends at the hair falling on the 
back of the head and in the ears of all the three 
figures there are earrings of exactly the same 
type. The dimple on the chin of the female 
figure, Fig. 33, and the seemingly more protruding 
chin of the male faces to mark the beard have of 
course no artistic bearing. These details as well as 
other differences in hair-dress etc. serve to indi- 
cate the different sexes, and the fact that the eyes 
of the male figure No. 2467+2802 are not 
plastically indicated, but only painted, does not 
effect the style but is only a question of artistic 
technique. It cannot therefore be doubted that 
these three sculptures are the work of the same 
artist. In discussing the sculptures of the Proto- 
Cypriote style we have seen that some of them 
are also assignable to one and the same artist 
or at least the same school (p. 36). Düring my 
studies on the Ajia Irini sculptures in connection 
with the presentation of the material here 
published I have made several observations bear- 
ing upon the attribution of groups of sculptures 
to the same artists, but I cannot tackle this 
Problem in this context, as it requires a compiete 
consideration of the whole sculptural material 
from Ajia Irini. This problem I intend to discuss 
on another occasion. 

Among the small human figurines of Idol 
plastic the female idol, Fig. 39 (No. 2804), 


attracts particular interest, in part because it is 
one of the few female figures represented among 
the sculptures from Ajia Irini^*, in part because 
it is one of the earliest statuettes in human 
shape found at Ajia Irini. This type of Statuette 
may be as early as Cypro-Geometric I — II*®, 
but the similar statuettes found in the sanctua- 
ries of Ajios Jakovos” and Idalion“ cannot be 
proved to be earlier than Cypro-Geometric III, 
though they may in fact have been that, and the 
earliest date of the Ajia Irini Statuette, although 
unfortunately without known find context, 
seems also to be Cypro-Geometric III or, at 
the latest, the early phase of Cypro-Archaic®: 
for typological reasons a later date is quite 

The Statuette, Fig. 40, belongs to Type 3; 
the specimens of this type with known find 
context belong to Cypro-Archaic I; the statuettes 
of this type are, however, so few that it cannot 
be determined whether they are restricted to 
that period alone or not. The Statuette, Fig. 40. 
is of a crude workmanship: its thick brows and 
large pellet eyes resemble very much those of the 

In Arch. Rel. Wiss, XXX, 1932, pp. 342 f. Sjöqvist 
mentions only two exoeptions from tbe rule that tbe soilp- 
tures are male, the moulded figure (op. dt. II, PI. CCXXX 
111:5) and a figurine seated on a throne {pp. cit. n. CC 
XXXIllilO, 11). Although the exceptions are still few, we 
may add: the female dancers {op. dt. PI. CCXXXI11:6). 
the female Partners in the group of ring-dancers published 
here, Fig. 16; the female idol, No. 2362 {op. cit. PI. CX 
XXIX :2), the female idol here discussed (Fig. 39); the 
Cypro-Greek sculpture (Fig. 33) and, probably, the head 
of the Second Proto-Cypriote style (Fig. 25) on account of 
its wearing a pendant on a neck-string (p. 20). Whether 
its counter-part {op. dt. PI. CCX1I:3, 6, 7) is also female 
is uncertain as it wears no female attributes. 

Similar, though not identical, statuettes have been 
found in Tomb 415 and 419 at Lapithos dating from 
Cypro-Geometric II, resp. I {op. dt. I, PI. XLIX;4, 5). 

" Op. dt. pp. 361 ff., PI. LXVUI:6, 44. 

“ Op. dt. II, p. 587, Female figures, Type 2, assignable 
to the local Period 4 at Idalion {op. dt. p. 616; PI. CL 
XXXII: 14); this period dates from Geometrie III and the 
early phase of Cypro-Archaic I, although it may have in- 
cluded also some poor remains of Cypro-Geometric I-ll 
{op. dt. p. 624). 

** The earliest sculptures of a human shape found at 
Ajia Irini belong to the local period 3, covering the later 
half of Cypro-Geometric III and the first half of Cypro- 
Archaic I (cf. p. 34). 

Digitized by t^ooQle 

female Statuette, Fig. 39, and for typological 
reasons the Statuette, Fig. 40, may thus be 
assigned to Cypro-Geometric III. Unfortunately 
the fragments of which it has been put together 
are without known find context. 

The Statuette, Fig. 41, of Type 7, can be 
associated with the late phase of the First Proto- 
Cypriote style, on the evidence of the features 
of its face**, and it can therefore be assigned to 
the early phase of Cypro-Archaic II {op. dt. 
IV:2, p. 208). 

Among the large human figorines of Idol 
ptostic the Statuette, Fig. 42 (No. 2316), is a large- 
sized adorant idol, a counterpart to the Statu- 
ette, Fig. 39, mentioned above, but it is bisexual, 
as indicated by the fenude breasts and the beard; 
further, the snake Curling along the back of the 
figure associates it with the adorant bisexual 
Minotaur figures: in fact, this idol represents an 
intermediate stage between the theriomorph, or 
semi-theriomorph, and human shape of the 
votive figures. It can be assigned to Cypro-Geo- 
metric III or the early phase of Cypro-Archaic I 
(cf. below), and it shows that the decisive Step 
towards a conception of the deity itself in human 
shape was taken in the period mentioned. This 
is further indicated by the fact that the first 
human figures without bisexual or theriomorph 
association with the time past begin to appear in 
this period, as proved by the small Statuette, 
Fig. 39, and the larger Statuette, Fig. 43 (No. 
2372), which together with the bisexual figure 
mentioned and the Statuette No. 2321 form the 
three spedmens of large-sized human figurines 
assignable to the local Period 3 at Ajia Irini 
{op. dt. II, p. 814), as we know covering the 
later part of Cypro-Geometric III and the early 
phase of Cypro-Archaic I (cf. p. 34). 

The other large-sized statuettes (Figs. 44—51) 
are normal representatives of idol plastic Con- 
temporary with the art sculpture of the First 
and Second Proto-Cypriote styles. Some of 
these statuettes reflect vaguely, others more 

“a. e.g. op. dt. Pis. CXCVIII, ca. 

closely, the style of the Contemporary art sculp- 
ture, as already pointed out in the excavation 
report (op. dt. pp. 790 f.) and in the general 
Classification made in op. dt. IV:2, p. 127. In 
the course of time stylistic qualities mark more 
and more this idol plastic, so that it is often 
impossible to make a distinction between these 
categories, idol plastic and art sculpture, as also 
shown by the intermediate specimens mentioned 
above in the sections dealing with the Second 
Proto-Cyptriote and the Cypro-Greek styles 
(pp. 36 f.). 

Some remarks have to be added on a few 
Objects of various character (Figs. 52—56). 

It is instructive to compare the sphinx forming 
part of a throne, Fig. 52, with the sphinxes 
flanking a throne of a similar kind upon which 
a female figurine is seated (op. dt. II, PI. 
CCXXXIII:10, 11). The latter throne is assign- 
able to the local Period 3 at Ajia Irini (for the 
interesting conditions of finds, cf. op. dt. pp. 
806 f.), and dates therefore from the later part 
of Cypro-Geometric III or, more likely for 
stylistic reasons, the early part of Cypro- 
Archaic I: the facial features of the sphinx 
approach those characteristic of the First Proto- 
Cypriote style. The facial features of the sphinx, 
Fig. 52, are clearly Neo-Cypriote and these 
stylistic criteria are confirmed by the find con- 
texts: the fragment was found in Square L 6 at a 
level of 97.7—98.7, i.e. it belongs to the local 
Period 5 at Ajia Irini, c. 560— 540 B.C., a period 
in which the Neo-Cypriote style flourished. 

The stylized flowers, Fig. 53, have of course 
been held by one or two votive statues, most 
probably female. 

The thunderbolts, Fig. 54, on the other hand, 
must have been attributes of a statue of the god 
worshipped, confirming that he was a weather 
god. No sculpture that can be proved to repre- 
sent this god has yet been identified but among 
the sculptural fragments there are some which 
look promising for such an identification. More 
fragments must, however, be found to ascertain 
the matter. The thunderbolts to the right on Fig. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

54 have the lower terminals of the same shape 
as the flowers (Fig. 53), intended for being 
inserted into a hand. The thunderbolt, Fig. 54, 
to the left, cannot have been inserted directly 
into a hand but must have been fixed to a shaft. 
Sjöqvist has shown that the god worshipped at 
Ajia Irini has been related to the Near Eastem 
fertility and weather god, in the religious 
imagination of the worshippers conceived in 
the shape of a bull, and if we study the repre- 
sentations of the various types of thunderbolts 
associated with these Near Eastem gods we find 
that besides the double-ended thunderbolts of 
three or more rays, the single-ended thunderbolts 
with one, two or three rays are also represented 
and the thunderbolt with bent shaft-hole may 
well have formed part of such an one-sided 
thunderbolt with two or three rays“. 

Fig. 55 shows one ear of a Statuette pierced by 

**For these various types of thunderbolts associated 
with the Near Eastem fertility and weather god, cf. Jahrb, 
deutsch, arch. Inst. XLEI, 1928, pp. 101 ff., Figs. 12, 
14—27, 32—38. Sometimes these thunderbolts are held by 
the god, sometimes fixed on the back of the bull. 

four holes, probably used for fastening an ear- 
omament of which no specimens have been 
found so far, but is often represented on the 
sculptures“ and is usually called ear-ciqi. 

Finally, Fig. 56, the vaae in the flhape of an 
astragalos. Its date is not later than the early 
phase of Cypro-Archaic II, because it was found 
in a layer containing potsherds of Types IV and 
V, corresponding to those found in the layer 
of the local Period 4 at Ajia Irini, covering the 
time between c. 650 and 560 B.C. We know that 
astragaloi, both real ones and imitated in 
various materials, were used as votive offerings 
in the sanctuaries and given as tombgifts to the 
deceased; they were also used as adomment on 
earrings and necklaces and as amulets. Further, 
they were used as weights and as vases, in Greece 
fairly often represented by Black Glazed 

“ Swed. Cyp. Exp. IV:2, Pis. 11:3; VD:!, 2; Vni:2. 

For a recent survey of the material in question see 
Hampe, Die Stele aus Pharsalos im Louvre (107. Winckel> 
mannsprogramm, Berlin 1951, pp. 12 f., nn. 3 — 11). 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Kreta, Tiber und Stora Mellösa. 
Bemerkungen zu zwei Bronzeschwertem 
aus dem Tiber 


Die zwei Bronzeschwerter Abb. 1—4 sind im 
Jahre 1960 in Rom im Antiquitätenhandel er- 
worben. Hierbei gegebenen Auskünften zufolge 
sind die beiden Schwerter, zusammen mit 
einer bedeutend jüngeren Bronzeschale, nach 
einer Ueberschwemmung im Strandlager am 
Tiber oberhalb von Rom einige Tage vor der 
Erwerbung gefunden^ Die Fundangaben schei- 
nen glaubwürdig zu sein, auch wenn sie nicht 
näher kontrolliert werden können. In diesem 
Aufsatz gehe ich davon aus, dass der Fundort 
richtig angegeben ist. 

Beide Schwerter gehören zu der grossen 
Gruppe der Griifzungenschwerter. lieber den 
Ursprung dieser Schwerter ist seit langem viel 
diskutiert worden. Durch ihre grosse Verbreitung 
vom östlichen Mittelmeergebiet und Kleinasien 
über Griechenland und Italien, Mittel- und 
Westeuropa bis hinauf nach Mittelskandinavien 
erhält die Frage nach dem Aufkommen und 
nach der Entwicklung der Gruppe grosse Be- 
deutung. Kaum irgendeine andere so relativ ein- 
heitliche Form vorgeschichtlicher Metalldenk- 

' Die Schwerter (und die Bronzeschale) sind ein Ge- 
schenk S.M. König Gustav VI. Adolfs an das Medel- 
havsmuseet, Stockholm. Inv. Nr. MM 1960:25 (Abb. 2) 
und MM 1960:26 (Abb. 1). Ich danke Professor Axel 
Boöthius, Rom, für die Provenienzangaben. 

mäler zeigt eine so weite Verbreitung. Die Ein- 
heitlichkeit ist indessen zu einem gewissen Grade 
trügerisch. Eine genaue Prüfung zeigt, dass es 
zahlreiche Varianten mit lokaler, begrenzter 
Ausbreitung gibt. Ebenso muss man damit 
rechnen, dass das organische Material aus Horn, 
Knochen oder Holz, das die Griffzunge beklei- 
dete, eine etwas ungleiche Ausformung innerhalb 
der verschiedenen Gebiete hatte. Die Ähnlich- 
keit der GriSzungenschwerter über grosse Teile 
Europas ist somit teilweise nur scheinbar. Es ist 
daher von grösstem Gewicht, die kleinen Unter- 
schiede, die Vorkommen, im Detail nachzuweisen 
und die Zeitstellung der verschiedenen Varianten 

Die grundlegenden Arbeiten für das Studium 
der Griffzungenschwerter sind von Naue, Sprock- 
hoff imd Cowen geschrieben*. Naues Publikation 
erschien 1903 und seine TypeneinteUung ist 
nicht genau genug, um heutigen Ansprüchen zu 
genügen. Sprockhoffs Arbeit von 1931 und die 
von Cowen von 1956 haben die Forschung einen 

•J. Naue, Die vorrömischen Schwerter aus Kupfer, 
Bronze und Eisen, 1903. — E. Sprockhoff, Die germa- 
nischen Griifzungenschwerter, 1931. — J. D. Cowen, 
Eine Einführung in die Geschichte der bronzenen Griif- 
zungenschwerter in Süddeutschland und den angrenzen- 
den Gebieten, 36. Ber.d.Röm.-Germ. Komm. 1955, 1956. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

grossen Schritt weitergeführt. SprockhofT be- 
handelt die Griffzungenschwerter in Nord- 
europa und Cowen dieselbe Schwertergruppe in 
Süddeutschland und den angrenzenden Gebieten. 
Eine ebenso vollständige Durcharbeitung der 
Griffzungenschwerter im Mittelmeerraum gibt 
es noch nicht. Die grosse Gruppe früher Griff- 
zungenschwerter in Nordeuropa (Sprockhoff 
Typ la und Ib) mit mindestens ca. 200 Exempla- 
ren gehört zu Montelius’ Periode llb-c. In der 
mitteleuropäischen Chronologie entspricht das 
Reineckes Bronzezeit C sowie möglicherweise 
teilweise Bronzezeit D. Aus Süddeutschland 
und den angrenzenden Gebieten verzeichnet 
Cowen 32 Exemplare derselben Form. Er datiert 
sie in die Bronzezeit C. Reinecke hat nach- 
gewiesen, dass zumindest Sprockhoffs Typ la 
mit ausgebuchteter Zunge von Schwertemdes 
Keszthely (Boiu)-Typs in Ungarn hergeleitet 
werden kann’. Hingegen ist noch nicht klar- 
gelegt, wie Typ Ib mit gerader Zunge entstanden 
ist. In der Bz D und in der frühen Hallstattzeit A 
kommen in Mitteleuropa Sprockhoffs Griff- 
zungenschwerter „vom gewöhnlichen Typ” vor, 
die — zum Unterschied von der Mehrzahl derer 
vom Typ la und Ib — mehrere Nieten in der 
Zunge sowie schräge Schultern haben. Cowen 
nennt diese Form den „Nenzinger Typ”. Im 
Jahre 1931 kannte Sprockhoff ca. 350 solche 
Schwerter in Nordeuropa, wo sie Montelius" 
Periode III zugehören, und Cowen im Jahre 1956 
ca. 50 Exemplare in Süddeutschland und den an- 
grenzenden Gebieten. Dieser Typ ist von allen 
Griffzungenschwertem der am weitesten verbrei- 
tete. Seit langem ist er auch in einer kleineren 
Zahl aus Griechenland und aus dem östlichen 
Mittelmeerraum bekannt. Es ist die erste Form 
von Griffzungenschwertem, die sowohl in Mittel- 
europa wie im östlichen Mittelmeergebiet vor- 
kommt. Mehrere Archäologen, u. a. Childe, 
haben die Idee der mitteleuropäischen Griff- 
zungenschwerter aus dem östlichen Mittelmeer- 

* P. Reinecke, Zur Geschichte der Griffzungenschwer- 
ter, Germania 15, 1931, 217 ff. 


raum herleiten wollen*. Der Nenzinger Typ hat 
indessen in Mitteleuropa die reiche Entwicklung 
von Sprockhoffs Typ I als Hintergrund und 
ähnliche Voraussetzungen können im ägäischen 
Gebiet oder in Kleinasien nicht nachgewiesen 
werden*. Eine andere Sache ist es, dass es dort 
frühe Griffzungenschwerter gibt, die jedoch 
nicht mit den mitteleuropäischen Formen ver- 
knüpft werden können. Soviel wir jetzt sehen 
können, so dürfte es am richtigsten sein, mit 
einer mitteleuropäischen Entwicklung von Griff- 
zungenschwertem zu rechnen, die von dem 
ungarischen Boiu Typ ausgehen, und mit einer 
hiervon gänzlich getrennten Entwicklung im 
östlichen Mittelmeerraum, einer Entwicklung, 
die noch nicht völlig untersucht ist. In der Ha 
A-Periode treffen sich somit in der ägäischen 
Welt die ursprüngheh aus dem Mittelmeerraum 
herstammenden und die mitteleuropäischen Ty- 
pen, die als Import eingeführt werden oder als lo- 
kale Nachbildungen entstehen. Das gilt nicht nur 
für die Griffzungenschwerter sondern auch für 
andere Bronzeformen, wie Lanzenspitzen und 
Messer. Man kann zur gleichen Zeit mitteleuro- 
päische Typen im östlichen Mittelmeergebiet 
aufspüren und Impulse und Importstücke aus 
Griechenland nördlich über den Balkan nach 
dem östUchen Mitteleuropa und westlich über 
das Mittelmeer nach Westeuropa hin nach- 
weisen. In diesem Aufsatz soll untersucht wer- 
den, wie sich die zwei Tiberschwerter in diesen 
Zusammenhang einfügen. 

Das wohlerhaltene Schwert Abb. 1 und 3 ist 
61,1 cm lang. Die Zunge ist in der Mitte schwach 
ausgebuchtet und das Heft hat V-Form. Die 
Zunge wird von niedrigen Rändern begrenzt 
1,0 bis 1,1 cm hoch, die in ihrem obersten Teil 
ausgesprochene Hörner haben. Am Knaufende 

*V. G. Childe, The Final Bronze Age in the Near 
East and in Temperate Europe. Proc. of the Prehist. Soc. 
N.S. XIV, 1948, 183 ff. - Vgl. auch H. W. Catling, 
Bronze Cut-and-Thrust Swords in the Eastem Medi- 
terranean. Proc. of the Prehist. Soc. N.S. XXIl, 1956, 
102 ff., der jedoch ganz von Naues alter Einteilung aus- 

» Cowen, 1956, 68 f. 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

Abb, 3-4. MM 1960:26 und 25. Detail. M. ca. 1:2. 

Abb. 1—2. Am Tiber gefundene Schwerter , MM 1960:26 
und 25. Medelhavsmuseety Stockholm. Etwas kleiner als 

des Griffes befindet sich ein 3,2 cm langer 
spatenförmiger Zungenfortsatz. Die Zunge weist 
4 und das Heft 2x3 Nietlöcher auf. Das erste 
und das dritte Nietloch ist grob von derselben 
Seite her eingeschlagen, das zweite und vierte 
von der entgegengesetzten Seite. Die Nietlöcher 
im Heft sind sämtlich von der gleichen Seite her 
eingeschlagen ausser dem untersten links auf 
Abb. 3. Die Zunge ist 0,45 cm dick. Der Ueber- 
gang vom Heft zur Klinge ist weich geschwungen. 
Die Klinge ist breit und nach unten zu ausge- 
buchtet, d. h. blattförmig. An ihrer breitesten 
Stelle ist sie 4,1 cm und am schmaleren oberen 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Teil unter dem Heft 3,5 cm breit. Die Klinge 
hat nahezu rhombischen Querschnitt, der untere 
Teil ist jedoch flacher. Die Schneide ist vom 
Rücken der Klinge durch eine scharfe Kante 
abgesetzt. Die Patina ist abgeschliifen ausser auf 
der Zunge und auf Teilen der Schneide. Die 
erhaltene Patina ist blauschwarz. 

Das zweite Schwert, Abb. 2 und 4, ist 72,3 cm 
lang. Auch dieses ist wohlerhalten. Die Zunge 
buchtet im unteren Teil aus. Die Ausbuchtung 
ist gut markiert und viel deutlicher als bei dem 
ersten Schwert. Das Heft hat nahezu U-Form. 
Die Zunge wird von niedrigen Rändern begrenzt, 
0,9— 1,0 cm hoch, die in ihrem oberen Teil in 
ausgesprochene Hörner auslaufen. Die Zunge 
hat eine 3,8 cm lange Verlängerung. Im unteren 
Teil der Zunge befindet sich ein Nietloch und 
im unteren Teil des Heftes 2x1 Nietlöcher. Die 
Nietlöcher sind gut gearbeitet und abgeschliifen. 
Die Zunge ist 0,45 cm dick. Der Uebergang 
zwischen Heft und Klinge geschieht in schärfe- 
rem Winkel als beim Schwert Abb. 1. Die Klinge 
ist blattförmig, an ihrer breitesten Stelle 3,7 cm 
und am schmaleren oberen Teil 3,1 cm breit. Die 
ganze Klinge hat deutlich rhombischen Quer- 
schnitt. Die Schneide ist vom Rücken durch eine 
schwach markierte Kante abgesetzt. Das Schwert 
ist mit gleichförmiger, blauschwarzer Patina von 
gleicher Art wie beim ersten Schwert belegt. Auf 
der abgebildeten Seite, Abb. 4, sieht man die 
Grenze für den Heftbelag. 

Cowens Arbeit über die süddeutschen Grilf- 
zungenschwerter kann zum Ausgangspunkt für 
die Diskussion dienen. Beide italische Schwerter 
gehören zur Hauptgruppe unverzierte Griff- 
zungenschwerter mit blattförmigen Klingen*. 
Diese Schwerter werden in drei Typen eingeteilt, 
den Erbenheimer Typ (20 Exemplare und eine 
Gussform), den Lettener Typ (9 Exemplare) und 
den Hemigkofener Typ (49 Exemplare). Vom 
Erbenheimer Typ weist Cowen auch eine 
Variante nach, die Ennsdorfer Variante (3 
Exemplare). Der Erbenheimer und Lettener 

• CowEN, 1956, 72 ff. 


Typ hat einen markierten Griffzungenfortsatz 
geradeso wie die zwei hier besprochenen ita- 
lischen Schwerter. Das Schwert Abb. 1 gehört 
zum Lettener Typ, der durch eine sehr schwach 
ausbuchtende Zunge mit 3—5 Nieten und 4-6 
Nieten am Heft gekennzeichnet ist (Abb. 5—6). 
Die Länge variiert zwischen 62,4 und 59,5 cm. 
Das italische Schwert fügt sich sehr gut hier ein. 

Kein Schwert vom Lettener Typ ist in einem 
datierbaren Zusammenhang gefunden worden. 
Die grosse Ähnlichkeit mit dem Hemigkofener 
Typ (Abb. 8-10) einerseits und dem Erben- 
heimer Typ andererseits lässt, nach Cowen, ver- 
muten dass der Lettener Typ eine Hybridform 
zwischen diesen beiden darstellt. Da beide Haupt- 
formen mittels datierbarer Grabfunde zur Ha A 
gerechnet werden können, ist eine Datierung 
des Lettener Typs in die gleiche Zeit durchaus 
glaublich. Cowen versucht den Erbenheimer 
Typ in die „frühe Ha A”-Periode zu begrenzen 
und teilt hierdurch auch den Lettener Typ der 
frühen Ha A-Periode zu. Diese Begrenzung 
dürfte nicht möglich sein, da der eine der beiden 
Grabfunde vom Erbenheimer Typ (Erbenheim 
bei Wiesbaden) in die frühe Ha A-Zeit (Ha A 1) 
und der andere (Wollmesheim in der Rhein- 
pfalz) in die späte Ha A-Periode (Ha A 2) 

Das Schwert Abb. 2 kommt dem Erbenheimer 
Typ am nächsten (Abb. 11 — 13). Bezeichnend 
ist eine in der Mitte weich ausbuchtende Zunge 
mit zahlreichen Nietlöchem sowohl am Griff 
wie am Heft. Das Heft hat nahezu U-Form. Die 
Klinge hat einen flachen rautenförmigen Quer- 
schnitt, ist lang und elegant geschwungen. £>ie 
Länge ist zwischen 74,5 und 64,5 cm, im Durch- 
schnitt 69,0 cm. Das italische Schwert unter- 
scheidet sich von den übrigen durch eine un- 
gewöhnlich kleine Anzahl Nieten, nur drei, und 
dadurch, dass die Ausbuchtung der Zunge tiefer 
als normal liegt. Die U-Form des Heftes ist 
ebenfalls deutlicher als bei den von Cowen ab- 
gebildeten Schwertern. Wie erwähnt wird der 
Erbenheimer Typ in die Ha A-Periode datiert. 

Ein Verzeichnis von in Italien gefundenen 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Abb. 5—7. Lettener Typ. Fundorte: Basel; Birsfelden bei Abb. 8—10. Hemigkofener Typ. Fundorte: Zihlkanalj 

Basel; Rouen. M. etwas grösser als 1:4. Nach Cowen 1956. Schweiz; Venlo, Holland; Boppard, Rheinprovinz. M. etwas 

grösser als 1:4. Nach Cowen 1956. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Schwertern aus der Bronzezeit ist 1926 vor 
Rellini veröffentlicht und 1942 von Caprino er- 
gänzt worden’. Die Verzeichnisse enthaltet 
alles in allem 332 Schwerter, von denen 12( 
auf dem Festland, 23 auf Sizilien und 189 aui 
Sardinien gefunden sind. Selbst wenn nocl: 
einige weitere Schwerter in kleineren Samm- 
lungen erhalten sind, so ist man berechtigt, die 
grosse Menge der von Rellini-Caprino publi- 
zierten Schwerter als repräsentativ für den 
Gesamtbestand anzusehen. Folgende Schwerter 
gehören dem Lettener Typ an oder nähern sich 

1. Am Trasimenischen See, Umbria, Länge 75 
cm, gerade Klinge. Schwach U-förmiges Heft. 
4-f 2 x2 Nietlöcher. Jetzt in unbekannter Samm- 
lung. — A. Ancona, Le armi, le fibule e qualche 
allo cimelio della sua coUezione archeologica. 
1886. Nr. 44 (Foto). Naue 1903, Taf. VI12 
(Zeichnung). Abb. 14 in diesem Aufsatz. Von 
Rellini-Caprino nicht aufgeführt. 

2. AleronOy Umbria, Länge 64 cm, gerade 
Klinge. V-förmiges Heft. 5+2x2 Nietlöcher. 
Mus. Preist, di Roma. — Montelius, La civil, 
prim, en Italic 11,1, 1904, PI. 126,11. Rellini 
1926, Nr. 77. 

3. Am Tiber, nördlich von Rom, Lazio, Schwert 
Abb. 1 und 3 in diesem Aufsatz. 

4. Fucino, Abruzzi, Länge 62 cm. Gerade oder 
blattförmige Klinge? V-förmiges Heft. 4+2x3 
Nictlöchcr. Mus. Preist, di Roma. — Monte- 
lius 1904, PI. 142,9 (nur Oberteil). Rellini 1926, 
Nr. 87. 

5. Fucino, Abruzzi, Länge 63 cm. Gerade oder 
blattförmige Klinge? V-fÖrmiges Heft. 2-r2x2 

’ U. Reluni, Per lo Studio dcllc spade di broozo 
scopertc in Italia, Bull, di Paletn. It. XLVI, 1926, 73 ff.- 
C. Caprino, Spada trovata presso lenne (Arsoli), Bull, 
di Paletn. It. N.S. V-VI, 1941-42, 198 ff. - Vgl. 
K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop, Notes on some distinctive 
types of Bronzes from Populonia, Etruria. Proc. of ihe 
Prehist. Soc. N.S. XII, 1956, 127. Anm. 1. 

Abb. 11 — 13. Erbenheimer Typ. Fundorte: Steinamagfr, 
Urgarn: Bönnigheim, Württemberg; Heilbronn, Württem- 
berg. M. etwas grösser als 1:4. Nach Cowen 1956. 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

Karte 1. Verbreitung des Lettener 
Typs und nahestehender Variante 
mit gerader Klinge in Italien. 

Nietlöchcr. Mus. Preist, di Roma. — Montclius 
1904, PL 142,10 (nur Oberteü), Rellini 1926, 
Nr. 88. 

6. Colle Brignile di S. Benedetto in PerilliSy 
Abruzzi. Länge 65 cm. Gerade oder blattförmige 
Klinge? 10 Nietlöcher. Keine Abbildung publi- 
ziert, aber Rellinis Beschreibung ist so genau, 
dass das Schwert trotzdem mit grosser Wahr- 
scheinlichkeit dieser Gruppe zugeteilt werden 
kann: „Spada a codolo piatto munito di 10 fori 
pei chiodi, 6 rimasti; in capo linguetta verticale 
fra due brevi appendici divergenti.” Als Typ 
gibt Rellini Montelius 1904, PI. 142,10, d.h. das 
oben erwähnte Schwert Nr. 5, an. Mus. Preist, 
di Roma. — Rellini 1926, Nr. 89. 

7. Puglie. Länge 61 cm, gerade Klinge, V-för- 
miges Heft. 3+2x3 Nietlöcher. Jetzt in un- 
bekannter Sammlung. — Naue 1903, Taf. VII,6, 
Abb. 15 in diesem Aufsatz. Bei Rellini-Caprino 
nicht aufgeführt. 

Folgende Gussform und zwei Schwerter ge- 

hören am ehesten dem Erbenheimer Typ an: 

1. Piverone bei IvreOy Piemonte. Gussform aus 
Steatit in zwei Hälften, Länge 83 cm. Für 
Schwerter in drei Längen: 75, 72 und 65 cm. 
Blattförmige Klinge. Das Heft beinahe U-förmig. 
Die Form gibt keine Nietlöcher an. Wurde 1942 
in der Chiesa Parrochiale aufbewahrt. — P. 
Barocelli, Bullet. Paletn. di It. N.S. II, 1938, 
130 f. Caprino 1942, Nr. 5. Cowen 1956, 131, 
Nr. 13. 

2. Casaley Veneto. Länge nach der angege- 
benen Skala ca. 44 cm, (ist das möglich?). 
Schwach blattförmige Klinge. Heft schwach 
U-förmig. 4+2x2 Nietlöcher. Museo Civico 
di Treviso. — R. Battaglia, Bull. Paletn. di It., 
Vol. fuori Serie 67-68, 1958-59, 284, Abb. 
98 b. Von Rellini-Caprino nicht genannt. 

3. Am Tibety nördlich von Romy Lazio. Schwert 
Abb. 2 und 4 in diesem Aufsatz. 

Aus FucinOy Abruzzi liegt ein weiteres Schwert 
vor, das die Kennzeichen des Erbenheimer Typs 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

zeigt, die in der Mitte ausbuchtende Zunge, 
zahlreiche Nietlöcher (3+2x2), lange ge- 
schwungene Klinge (Montelius 1904, PI. 142,5. 
Rellini 1926, Nr. 86). Die Länge beträgt nach 
der Abbildungsskala 69 cm, d. h. genau die 
Länge, die für den Durchschnitt des Typs an- 
gegeben wird. Die Klinge buchtet nur schwach 
aus, wie bei dem Exemplar vom Tiber Abb. 1. 
Die einzige Abweichung besteht darin, dass der 
Griffzungenfortsatz fehlt. Dieses Exemplar ist 
die Ennsdorfer Variante, von der Cowen nur 
drei Exemplare angibt, eines aus Österreich 
(Ennsdorf, Grab aus Ha A), eines aus der 
Tschechoslowakei (Karpathorussland) und eines 
aus Polen (Galizien)®. Diese Form ist so selten 
und so zerstreut, dass sie kaum verdient als 
eigene Variante bezeichnet zu werden. Es ist 
eine rein zufällige Form, die hier und da einmal 
innerhalb oder ausserhalb der Grenzen des Ver- 
breitungsgebietes des Erbenheimer Typs vor- 

Nichts ist über die näheren Fundumstände 
aller dieser Schwerter bekaimt. Nichts in datier- 
barem Zusammanhang liegt vor. Mit Vorbehalt 
für eine kleinere zeitliche Verschiebung kann 
man für die italischen Schwerter dieselbe Ge- 
brauchszeit annehmen wie für die mitteleuro- 
päischen, d. h. Ha A. In absoluten Jahreszahlen 
würde dies, nach Müller-Karpe, das 12—11. 
Jahrhundert v. Chr. bedeuten und in italischer 
Periodenbezeichnung die ältere „Protovillanova- 

Mit Ausnahme des Schwertes von Puglie liegt 
die erste Gruppe gut in Mittelitalien gesammelt 
(Karte 1). Auch ihrem Typ nach gehört sie 
eng zusanunen. Einige haben jedoch gerade 
Klinge, während eines oder einige die für den 
Lettener Typ charakteristische Blattform zeigt, 
ln Nordueropa gibt es ebenfalls eine kleine 
Schwertgruppe, die dem Lettener Typ nahesteht 
aber durch eine gerade Klinge gekennzeichnet 
ist. Mindestens vier Schwerter gehören hierhin, 
darunter eines von Stora Mellösa in Närke in 

•Cowen 1956, 76 ff. 

Mittelschweden (Abb. 16) und eines aus Spandau 
bei Berlin (Abb. 17)*. Sowohl Sprockhoff wie 
Cowen halten es für das wahrscheinlichste, dass 
die nordische Gruppe einer einheimischen Werk- 
statt entstammt. Cowen nimmt an, dass diese 
Schwerter einheimische Abwandlungen impor- 
tierter Beispiele des Erbenheimer Typs sind 
(Schwerter von Parum in Mecklenburg und 

Die nordeuropäische und die mittelitalische 
Gruppe sind auffallend ähnlich, was darauf 
beruht, dass diese Varianten unter gleichen Vor- 
aussetzungen entstanden sind, trotz ihres grossen 
geographischen Abstandes. Die für grosse 
Teile Europas gemeinsamme Schwertform wäh- 
rend Bz D und früher Ha A-Zeit ist, wie erwähnt, 
das Griffzungenschwert von Cowens Nenzinger 
Typ. Die Zunge ist sehr schwach ausgebuchtet, 
ohne Fortsatz, aber oft mit kleinen Hörnern 
versehen. Der Uebergang zwischen Heft und 
Klinge ist weich und gerade. In Italien gibt es 
mindestens 8 Exemplare, von denen die Mehr- 
zahl in Mittelitalien liegt^®. Irgendwo in Mittel- 
europa, vielleicht in Süddeutschland, entsteht 
in der frühen Ha A-Periode eine Tendenz, diese 
Schwerter mit einer blattförmigen Klinge aus- 
zuformen, eine Tendenz, die im Norden während 
Ha A nicht durchschlägt und die eine sehr 
geringe Rolle in Mittelitalien gespielt zu haben 
scheint. In Mitteleuropa entsteht derHemigko- 
fener Typ (Abb. 8— 10), wovon man in Italien 
nur schwache Spuren findet. Ein Schwert von 
Montegiorgioy Ascoli-Piceno, in Mittelitalien ist 
eine Variante dieses Typs (Montelius 1904, PI. 
131,13; Rellini 1926, Nr. 64). 

Für das Aussehen des Schwertes kann es 

• Sprockhoff 1931, 21 ff. und 95 f Die restlichen zwei 
Schwerter sind von Bevensen, Kr. Ülzen, Hannover und 
vom Goplo-See, Polen. 

1. Cherasco, Piemonte. Caprino 1942, Nr. 4. — 2. 
Casale, Veneto, Battaglia 1958—59, Abb. 98 c. — 3—5. 
Beiverde di Cetonoy Toscana, Caprino 1942, Nr. 13 — 15. — 
6. Am Trasimenischen See^ Umbria, Rellini 1926, Nr. 74. 
Hier Abb. 18. — 7. Sulmona, Abruzzi. Naue 1W3, Taf. 
VII, 1. Hier Abb. 19. — 8. Poggio Berni, Forli, Emilia. 
Hortfund, Ha A. Tosi, Bull, di Paletn. It. N.S. 3, 1939, 
51 ff., Abb. 1, h, m. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

keine Rolle gespielt haben, ob die Schwertzunge 
einen Fortsatz hatte oder nicht. Die funktionelle 
Aufgabe des Zungenfortsatzes war, dem Schwert- 
knauf eine Stütze zu geben. Wenn auch den 
meisten Schwertern ein solcher Fortsatz fehlt, 
so hat man doch keinen Anlass, einen wesent- 
lich anderen Knauf anzunehmen. Was dieses 
Detail betrifft, so können die Schwerter in un- 
beschädigtem Zustand durchaus gleichartig aus- 
gesehen haben. Einen wesentlichen Unterschied 
zwischen den Typen stellt indessen die kräftig 
blattförmige Klinge, verglichen mit der geraden, 
dar. Der Zungenfortsatz kann als eine tech- 
nische Verbesserung für eine bessere Befestigung 
des Schwertknaufes angesehen werden. Durch 
Angabe einiger Ziffern kann gezeigt werden, 
welche Rolle dieses Detail innerhalb der ver- 
schiedenen Gebiete gespielt hat. Von den ca. 
375 von Sprockhoff aufgeführten nordeuropäi- 
schen Ha A-Schwertem mit Griffzunge haben 
9 Zungenfortsatz, von den ca. 135 von Cowen 
angegebenen Ha A-Schwertem mit Griffzunge aus 
Mitteleuropa (einschliesslich zweier hier nicht 
genannter Typen) haben 29 Zungenfortsatz und 
von den in diesem Aufsatz aufgezählten ca. 20 
italischen Ha A-Schwertem mit Griffzunge haben 
9 (und eine Gussform) Zungenfortsatz. 

Die mittelitalische Gmppe von Schwertern 
mit Zungenfortsatz kann auf ähnliche Weise 
wie die nordische betrachtet werden. Die Schwer- 
ter mit gerader Klinge sind von lokaler Her- 
stellung, während das Tiber-Schwert mit seiner 
leicht geschwungenen Klinge am wahrschein- 
lichsten ein mitteleuropäisches Produkt ist. 
Cowen bUdet zwei fast gleiche Schwerter ab, 
das eine aus Birsfelden bei Basel (hier Abb. 6) 
und das andere aus Rouen (hier Abb. 7). Damit 
kann man drei Gruppen von sehr gleichartigen 
und nahe verwandten Schwertern unterscheiden: 

1. Lettener Typ mit blattförmiger Klinge im 
eigentlichen Verbreitungsgebiet des Erbenheimer 
Typs in Mittel- und Westeuropa; 

2. Die nordeuropäische Gmppe mit gerader 
Klinge ausserhalb des eigentlichen Verbreitungs- 
gebietes des Erbenheimer Typs; 


3. Die mittelitalische Gmppe mit gerade 
Klinge ausserhalb des eigentlichen Verbreitungs 
gebietes des Erbenheimer Typs. 

Der Erbenheimer Typ hat seinen Schwerpunl 
am Rhein, vor allem im mittleren Teüe de 
Flussgebietes^'. Von den 8 Exemplaren de 
Lettener Typs mit bekanntem Fundort liege 
drei in der Schweiz am obersten Lauf des Rheine 
zwei in Süddeutschland, zwei in Frankreich a 
der Seine und eines in Belgien. Die mitte 
italischen Griffzungenschwerter mit Zungenfor 
satz knüpfen über das mittlere Alpengebiet a 
das obere Rheintal an. Die italische Gruppe voi 
Nenzinger Typ gehört mit Mitteleuropa ii 
weiteren Sinne zusammen. 

Aus Griechenland ist noch eine kleine Gmpi 
publiziert worden, die mit Erbenheim-Letu 
in Zusammenhang steht. Drei Grifizunge 
Schwerter von Kreta, eines von Patras auf d 
Peloponnes und eines aus Phokis haben Zunge 
fortsatz'*. Das Schwert von Anthea bei Patt 
und mindestens eines der kretensischen Schwei 
sind vom Lettener Typ (Abb. 20)“. Ausserdc 
gibt es noch einige Schwerter vom Nenzinj 
Typ sowie einige Bmchstücke von GrifTzimg« 
Schwertern von nicht näher bestimmbare 
Typ“. Einige Schwerter von Nenzinger T 
sind, worauf Milojöic hingewiesen hat, etw 

"CöwEN 1956, 77, Karte C. Es gibt noch ein p 
weitere hierhergehörige Schwerter auf osteuropäisch 
Gebiet, aber das KartenbUd wird nicht wesentlich \ 

'• V. Milojöiö, Einige „mitteleuropäische'* Fremdlii 
auf Kreta, Jahrb. d. Röm.-Germ. Zentralmus. Maim 
1955, 159 fif., Abb. 3:1, 4 und 21. - N. Kyparis 
Praktika 1938, 118 f. (Anthea bei Patras). — X. Tsoi 
TAS, Ephemeris Arch. 1897, 110, Abb. 1 (Phokis). 

“ S. A. Xanthoudides, Ephemeris Arch. 1904, 45 — 
Abb. 11. — G. Maraghiannis, Antiquitds cr^oises 
1912, PI. XXXV, 4. 

“ H. W. Catung i956, 109 ff. - J. Naue, Die Brona 
zeit in Oberbayem, 1894, Abb. 13 (Bruchstück 
Korinth). — P. Reinecke 1931, 220 Anm. 12 (Ithaka). 
Pendlebury, Brit. School at Athens, Ann. 38, 1937- 
Pl. 29 No. 500 (Bruchstück aus Karphi auf Kreta). 
Das Schwert von Kallithea, Catung 1956, 112, No 
hat eine kleine Spitze zwischen den zwei Hörnem. B 
hier nicht zu den Schwertern mit Zungefortsatz gerec^ 
worden. Abgebüdet von N. Yalourb, Ath. Mitteü. 
1960 (1962), Beü. 31. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Abb. 20—21, Fundorte: Mouliana^ Kreta; Schiste, Phokis, 
M. Nr, 20 ca, 1:3, Nr, 21 etwas kleiner als 1:2, Nr. 20 nach 
Maraghiannis 1912, Nr, 21 nach Tsountas 1897. 

zierlicher und leichter als die mitteleuropäischen. 
Das kann darauf hindeuten, dass es sich dabei 
um lokale Produkte handelt, die durch Ein- 
flüsse von den mitteleuropäischen Formen her 
entstanden sind. In diesem Zusammenhang ist es 
ausreichend zu konstatieren, dass mindestens 
zwei Griffzungenschwerter vom Lettener Typ 
sind und dadurch nahe Verbindung mit Mittel- 
europa bezeugen. Anscheinend sind sie in 
Mitteleuropa hergestellt. Ein wahrscheinlich 
lokal verfertigtes, nur 45 cm langes Schwert ist 
bei Enkomi auf Cypem gefunden“. 

Das zweite Schwert vom Tiber, Abb. 2 und 4, 
kommt dem Erbenheimer Typ am nächsten. Es 
imterscheidet sich von den ganz typischen 
Schwertern dieses Typus durch eine geringere 
Anzahl Nieten, durch die Ausbuchtung der 
Zunge unterhalb der Mitte und durch die deut- 
lichere U-Form des Heftes. Unter den von 
Cowen abgebildeten Schwertern findet sich 
nicht eines was in diesen Details mit dem Tiber- 
Schwert übereinstimmt. Näher konunt das 
Schwert aus Phokis mit kleiner Anzahl Nieten, 
U-förmigem Heft und der etwas unterhalb der 
Mitte ausbuchtenden Zunge (Abb. 21). Die 
Klinge des griechischen Schwertes ist nicht 
abgebUdet, wird jedoch im Text als gerade an- 
gegeben“. Die Klinge unterscheidet sich hierin 
vom Tiber-Schwert. Wo die beiden Schwerter 
hergestellt sind, kann nicht entschieden werden. 
Beide können lokale Produkte darstellen. Selbst 
wenn sie aus lokalen Werkstätten herstammen, 
so zeigen sic durch ihre Form eine innere Zu- 
sammengehörigkeit und nahe Anknüpfung zum 
Erbenheimer Typ in Mitteleuropa. 

Die mittelitalische Gruppe von Griffzungen- 
schwertem mit Zungenfortsatz liegt innerhalb 

“ Catling 1956, 115, PI. XI, 1. Die Länge des Schwer- 
tes wird S. 115 mit 45 cm angegeben, im Text zur Tafel 
mit 42 cm. 

H. Peake, The Bronze Age and the Celtic World, 
1922, PI. XII, 3 bildet ein Schwert ab, das aus Levadeia, 
Griechenland, herstammen soll. Der obere Teil des 
Schwertes is genau gleich Tsountas 1897, 110, Abb. 1, 
und die Klinge ist gerade. Es scheint eine Verwechslung 
stattgefunden zu haben. Vgl. Catling 1956, 113, No. 10. 


Digitized by LjOOQle 

des zentralen Gebietes der apenninischen Kultur 
während der „Protovillanova-Zeit”, und die 
Schwerter vom Nenzinger Typ liegen teilweise 
im gleichen Raum. Wie schon lange bekannt, 
ist das italische Bronzehandwerk auf dem Fest- 
land zu dieser 2^it in hohem Grade unselbstän- 
dig und wird von mitteleuropäischen Vorbildern 
geprägt. Zu den mitteleuropäischen Formen aus 
derselben Zeit wie das Tiber-Schwert gehören 
z. B. jüngere Violinbogenfibeln, Blattbügel- 
fibeln, Grifizungenmesser vom Matreier Typ 
und mittelständige LappenbeUe^^ Ohne genaue 
Untersuchungen ist es unmögUch, in Italien ver- 
fertigte Bronzegegenstände von importierten zu 
unterscheiden. Solange solche Untersuchungen 
nicht in grösserem Masstab ausgeführt worden 
sind, fehlt es an Unterlagen für Theorien dar- 
über, wie dieser starke mitteleuropäische Ein- 
fluss zustandegekommen ist, ob er Völker- 
wanderungen mit kriegerischen Eroberungen 
oder friedliche Landnahme, die Tätigkeit wan- 
dernder Metallgiesser, entwickelte Handelsver- 
bindungen oder eine Kombination dieser Fak- 
toren wiederspiegelt. 

Auch in Griechenland gibt es eine Reihe von 
Funden derselben Gegenstandstypen, die in 
Italien als mitteleuropäisch bezeichnet worden 
sind. Ueber sie ist eine lebhafte Diskussion 
geführt und verschiedene UrsprungsmögUch- 
keiten sind angegeben worden. Zumindest ein 
Teil dieser Gegenstände ist seinem Ursprung 
nach zweifellos mitteleuropäisch, während es 
sich bei anderen um ägäische Umformungen 
mitteleuropäischer Typen handelt**. Gewöhnlich 
wird der Weg über den Balkan für diesen mittel- 
europäischen Einfluss angeführt. Vor kurzem 
wies Sp. Marinatos mit neueren Funden aus 
dem Mittelmeerraum als Ausgangspunkt auf 
einen anderen wichtigen Weg hin**. Er hebt 

*^ H. Müller-Karpe, Beiträge zur Chronologie der 
Urnenfelderzeit nördlich und südlich der Alpen, 1959, 191, 
Abb. 26. 

*• Mnxuöie 1955, 153 ff. 

*• Sp. Marinatos, The Minoan and Mycenaean Civi- 
lization and its Influence on the Mediterranean and on 
Europe. Atti del VI congresso intemazionale delle 


Lipari mit sehr reichen Wohnplatzfunden als 
Station auf dem Wege nach dem westlichen 
Mittelmeer und nach Westeuropa hervor. Von 
Lipari kommt num leicht nach Sardinien und 
den Balearen oder nordwärts zum Golf von 
Neapel. Esist sicher kein Zufall, sagt Marinatos, 
dass man mykenische Spuren gerade auf Ischia 
imd bei Vivara findet. MUojöic hat betont, dass 
die auf Kreta gefundenen Peschiera-Dolche ihre 
nächstverwandte Analogie in Norditalien haben. 
Nach Marinatos erhält diese Beobachtung ihre 
Erklärung durch den angegebenen Seeweg via 
Ischia- Lipari— Griechenland**. Man muss aber 
auch die Verbindung über Puglie beachten. 
Auf dem Wohnplatz bei Scoglio del Tonno bei 
Tarent wurden unter anderem spätmykenische 
Vasenscherben, Bronzen in Typen vom östlichen 
Mittelmeergebiet und Bronzen vom gleichen 
mitteleuropäischen Typ gefunden, wie man ihn 
in Griechenland findet**. Unter den Bronzen 
war auch ein Peschiera-Dolch. 

Die griechische Gruppe von Griffzungen- 
schwertem mit Zungenfortsatz erhält auf Reiche 
Weise ihre Erklärung, wenn man eine direkte 
Seewegverbindung zwischen der mittelitalischen, 
apenninischen Gruppe und hierdurch indirekt 
mit dem Hauptgebiet des Typs im westlichen 
Mitteleuropa annimmt. Ein auflallender Zug in 
der Verbreitung der Schwertformen in der 
Ha A-Zeit ist, dass die Vollgriffschwerter im 
östlichen Mitteleuropa und die Griffzungen- 
schwerter im westlichen Mitteleuropa domi- 
nieren**. In Mittelitalien oder auf dem südlichen 
Balkan sind keine Vollgriffschwerter vom Ha 
A-Typ gefunden. Dieser Umstand gibt dem 
westlichen Weg für die griechischen Griff- 
zungenschwerter mit Zungenfortsatz eine noch 
grössere Wahrscheinlichkeit. Hierdurch erhält 
man auch eine Erklärung für die Ähnlichkeit 
des Tiber-Schwertes Abb. 2 mit dem Schwert 

scienze preistoriche e protoistoricbe, 1962, 161 ff. 

••MiLOJÖie 1955, 158. - Marinatos 1962, 170. 

** Müller-Karpe 1959, 30 ff., Taf. 13. 

“H. Müller-Karpe, Die Vollgriffschwcrtcr der 
Umenfelderzeit aus Bayern, 1961, 86 f., Karte 1 —4. 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

aus Phokis Abb. 21. Die erwähnten Messer vom 
Matreier Typ, die in Griechenland nicht unge- 
wöhnlich sind, haben die gleiche westliche Ver- 
breitung. Nach Müller-Karpe kommen sie in 
Bayern, Tirol, Schweiz und in Ober- und Mittel- 
italien, aber nicht im östlichen Mitteleuropa vor**. 
Hier geht cs nicht um die Frage, ob oder wie die 
verschiedenen ägäischen Typen einschneidiger 
Messer entstanden sind, ebensowenig wie es 
sich früher um die Entstehung der frühesten 
Grifizungenschwerter gehandelt hat. 

Selbst wenn wir mit dem hier skizzierten Weg 
des mitteleuropäischen Einflusses über Mittel- 
Itafaen nach Griechenland rechnen können, so 
spielt doch natürlich auch der nördliche Weg 
über den Balkan nach Griechenland eine wich- 
tige Rolle. Es war meine Absicht, auf eine 
bisher wenig beachtete Möglichkeit hinzuweisen. 
Die beiden Bronzeschwertcr vom Tiber gliedem 

«Müller-Karpe 1961, 41. - Vgl. N. K. Sandars, 
The Antiquity of the One-edged Bronze Knife in the 
Acgcan, Proc. of the Prehist. Soc. N.S. XXI, 1955, 174 ff. 

sich daher in einen wichtigen Zusammenhang 
ein. Mit dem Ausgangspunkt von verschiedenen 
Varianten von Griffzungensch wertem mit Zung- 
enfortsatz erhält man eine Andeutung eines 
Einflusses vom westlichen Mitteleuropa über 
die Alpen nach Mittelitalien und von dort 
weiter über die westliche Küste Mittelitaliens 
oder über Puglie auf dem Seewege nach Grie- 
chenland. Die west-mitteleuropäischen Impulse 
erreichen gleichzeitig den Norden und spiegeln 
sich in Mittelschweden im Schwerte von Stora 
Mellösa wieder. Ein Grabfund aus Hovby in 
Schonen, der einen cyprischen Griflangeldolch 
mit geraden Schultern und mit durchlochter 
Angel, einen Peschiera-Dolch, ein nordisches 
Miniaturmesser und eine nordische Fibel aus 
der frühen Periode III der nordischen Bronze- 
zeit enthielt, deutet denselben Weg zwischen 
dem östlichen Mittelmeer und Nordeuropa an“. 

“O. Monteuus, Minnen frän vär fomtid, 1917, Abb. 
885, 886, 922, 1024. — E. Sprockhoff, Ein Peschiera- 
dolch aus Nic^ersachsen, Germania 20, 1936, Taf. 33,2. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 


A Black-Figured Neck-Amphora of the 
Leagros Group 


The vase here publishcdS Figs. 1-7,20,21, 
which was presentcd to Medelhavsmuseet by His 
Majesty the King, was acquired in Rome, in 1961 . 
Nothing was then known of its provenance. In 
shape it is a neck-amphora, the height being 
0.408 m. It is unbroken and vcry well preserved, 
except for slight dents in the suiface in places. 
There is no repainting. 

As will bc explained below, this is ABV^ p. 374, 
no. 197. 

A. Apollo in a chariot drawn by four horses, 
accompanied by Artemis and Hermes. 

A young man Stands in a light chariot with 
two whcels (of which one only is seen) drawn by 
four horses, holding the reins of the horses. His 
head overlaps into the tongue-pattem above the 
picture. He has a short beard, is dressed in a 
himation and wears a fillet round his head. The 

^ Inv. no. MM 1962:7. My thanks arc duc to Dr. O. 
Vessber^ Director of Medelhavsmuseet, for permission 
to publish this vase. 1 have also to thank the Staatliche 
Museen, Antikenabteilung, West-Berlin, the British Mu- 
seum, Department of Gmk and Roman Antiquities, 
London, the Direktion der Antikensanunlungen, Munich, 
II Soprintendente alle Antichitä, Naples, the Royal On- 
tario Museum, Toronto, and the Martin von Wagner 
Museum, Würzburg, which sent photographs of their 
vases and allowed me to publish them, and Sir John 
Beazley for Information conceming the Stockholm vase. 


horses have all four hooves on the ground, yet 
give the Impression of moving. They bend their 
heads in various ways so that three of them are 
clearly seen, while the ear is all that shows of the 
fourth, behind the head of the third. On the 
further side of the horses a woman tums to- 
wards the charioteer, lifting her right hand in a 
gesture of sorrow or greeting. She wears a long 
Chiton and a mantle over her shoulders, a fillet 
is tied round her head. At the horses’ heads and 
half-hidden by them Hermes walks to the right 
but tums round looking at the charioteer. He is 
dressed, in the usual way, in a short chiton, 
cloak, winged boots tied with String, and a 
peaked petasos; his long plait of hair is tied up 
by means of a ribbon. The head of Hermes cuts 
into the palmette of the handle-omament.- 
Undemeath the horses a small deer grazes. 

Neither the charioteer nor the wonum have any 
attributes to identify them with certainty. Since, 
however, the deer is an animal sacred to Artemis, 
it seems most likely that the woman is to be 
identified with her. The man to whom she bids 
farewell is then most probably her brother, 
Apollo. — In fact, the deer is also his sacred 
animal so that this too points to Apollo as the 
charioteer; again, the woman is Artemis (or 
possibly his mother). One notes that the similar 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 1. Neck-amphora, Medelhavs- 
museet, Stockholm, MM 1962:7. 

sccnes refcrred to below, arc all taken from the 
sphere of the gods and heroes. 

There is red in ApoUo’s beard and fillet and 
on Artemis’s fillet; Apollo’s himation is de- 
corated with red dots and Hermes’s cloak with 
red borders; further, there are red strokes along 
the horses" manes and tails. 

White was used for the face of Artemis, but 
this has for the most part faded. 

B. Dionysus and Ariadne with two Satyrs. 

Dionysus is seated on a folding-chair with 

animals’ feet, with Ariadne on his hither side. 
Both are dressed in long chitons and big mantles 
and wear wreaths of ivy; Dionysus has a long 
beard. He holds the kantharos in his left hand, 
the vine in his right (though this is not rendered 
in a wholly clear manner). At either side of 
them, a Satyr prances; both dance away from 
them but turn round and look at them. The Satyr 
to the right shouts or sings (his mouth is half 
open); he wears a panther’s skin knotted around 
his Shoulders, the panther’s head showing above 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 3. MM 1962:7, 

Fig, 4 . MM 1962:7, 

bis left Shoulder. The vine, with bunches of grapes, 
spreads out at both sides in the background of 
the picture. 

Since the woman is crowned with ivy and is 
accompanied by Satyrs, she is more probably 
Ariadne than, for instance, Semele (cf. ÄBV^ 
p. 374, no. 197). 

Incision is used for the stars decorating the 
garments of Dionysus and Ariadne and for the 
short strokes on the panther’s skin. 

Red is used in the hair and beards of the male 
figures and for the decorative dots and borders 
of the garments; further for the tenons of the 

White was used for the face, hands, and feet 
Fig. 2, MM 1962:7, 

of Ariadne. This has mostly faded so that her 
figure is now a iittie difficuit to distinguish. 

Further decoration: On the neck, a lotus-and- 
palmette-omament with much incision and red 
detail. On the shoulder, a tongue-pattern with 
altemating black and red tongues; a break is 
made in it under each handle, i. e. it was painted 
after the handles were attached. Below the 
handles, a scroll of conventional type, painted 
without incision. This was evidently painted 
after the pictures. It is indicated for instance by 
the manner in which Hermes conceals part of 
it (Figs. 3, 6); further (Figs. 4, 5), by the fact that 
the palmette, on the other side of the vase, makes 
allowances for the wheel of the chariot, and, 
especially, by another feature of the same scroll. 
Thus, the upper right hand palmette shows 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

only the tip of a tendril, above the shoulder of 
the chariotcer, as if the rest wcre hidden behind 
him. This is, however, done so that it clearly 
Shows that the charioteer was thcre before the 
scroU and that the artist had to take it into 

Below the hgure zone, which is bordered 
underneath by a black line, forming a ground 
line for the figures, there is a chain of lotus 
buds, with dots, and below that, a zone of rays. 

The foot is black, except for the ridge and a 
narrow band at the bottom. The lip of the vase 
is also black, inside and out, except for the 
upper side. The inside of the vase is black as far 
down as the shoulder. The triple handles are 
painted black on the outside. 

The black paint has smeared in places, e.g. 
on one of the handle-ornaments and on the 
vine on B; there is further a blot of black paint 
on A, below the horses’ reins. 

The black glaze has misfired and tumed into 
red on A on the right-hand Satyr and handle, 
and on B on Hermes and in a large area on and 
around the other handle (where it shows on the 

On the underside of the foot there are two 
grafliti, an arrow-like shape and another which 
is probably a ligature of A and ff; see Fig. 21. 

It is at once clear that the vase here published, 
although made by very competent and skilful 
craftsmen, is not the work of any of the great 
artists. Further, its style shows it to belong to 
the later Black-figure,. towards the end of the 
sixth Century. The dosest stylistic afBnities are 
found within the Leagros Group* and, morc 
espedally, among those vases which J. D, Beaz- 
ley has assembled under the name of the Group 
of Würzburg 210*. The question arises whether 
this vase, the previous fortunes of which are un- 
known, is not identical with the ncck-amphora 
listed by Beazley in ABV, p. 374 as no. 197 of 

• Beazley, ABV, pp. 354 ff., where refercnces to the ear- 
lier literature are given. Cf. also Rumpf, Malerei u. 
Zeichn., p. 77 with note 2. 

» Pp. 354, 357 f. 


the Leagros Group. It has the caption ''Roman 
Market’’ and is defined as being "near the Group 
of Würzburg 210”; the description, although 
not quite complete, seems to point to this. 
Sir John Beazley has kindly confirmed by letter 
that it "is indeed the samc vase”. Thus, the 
present study wiU not bring forward much that 
is new. 1 take the opportunity, however, to 
discuss a little known group of vases, some of 
which have never been reproduced before, and 
to Show, I hope, that the neck-amphora now in 
Stockholm, is not mercly "near the Group of 
Würzburg 210”, but a proper member of it. 

The Group of Würzburg 210 comprises four- 
teen vases. The majority are neck-amphorae, like 
the one here published, two are Panathenaic 
in shape. On four of them, namely Würzburg 210 
and 214*, Toronto 927.39.3* and London B 206 
(Panathenaic)*, Figs. 8, 10— 12, the motif on the 
main side is a god or hero setting out in a chariot, 
accompanied by other mythical figures. On the 
first of these vases the charioteer is Herakles 
with lolaos beside him, on the others Dionysus, 
in one case, on the Toronto vase, with Ariadne 
at his side.— ln general, the composition is 
strikingly similar to that of the corresponding 
picture on our vase. Further, the general render- 
ing as well as many details of the latter vase are 
identical with those of the others. Thus, the 
charioteers on the five vases, whether they re- 
present lolaos and Herakles, Dionysus and 
Ariadne, or Apollo, have exactly the same 
stance and drapery; the horses correspond 
closely in the rendering of anatomical details and 
in their bearing (note espedally the heads). 
Hermes on the Stockholm vase recurs almost 
exactly on the one in Toronto. The deer present 
in two of the pictures, beside our own, are all 
very like each other. 

* ABV, p. 373, DOS. 178, 179, Lanolotz, Griech. Vasen 
in Würzburg, pls. 52 and 58; our Figs. 8 — 10. 

* ABV, p. 373, no. 180, Robinson and Harcum, Cat. of 
Greek Vases in the Royal Ontario Mus. of Arch., Toronto, 
no. 306, pl. 41, our Fig. 11. 

* ABV, p. 369, no. 120, CV British Mus. 4, III He pl. 46, 
our Figs. 12—13. 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

Ftg. 9. Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum, neck- 
amphora K 2 JO, 

Fig, 8, Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum, neck- 
amphora K 210, 

Fig. 10. Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum, neck 
amphora K 214. 

Fig. 11. Toronto, Royal Ontario Museum, neck- 
amphora 927.39.3. 

Digitized by 

The second picture on the Stockholm vase, 
Dionysus Holding kantharos and vine, with 
Ariadne, flanked by two Satyrs, recurs in a 
similar form on two of the vases just described, 
Würzburg 210 and London B 206, Figs. 9 and 
13. On the latter, Dionysus and Ariadne sit side 
by side on a folding-chair, as on our vase, while 
the Satyrs and Maenads dance along. On Würz- 
burg 210, however, Dionysus Stands upright 
between two Satyrs, with a man-headed goat at 
his side. This motif of the god Standing motion- 
less between Satyrs, or Satyrs and Maenads, 
is further represented on five other vases of the 
group, namely the neck-amphorae Berlin F 1845% 
Fig. 15, Munich 1568®, Fig. 16, Vogell 61% 
New York 41.162.179^® and the Panathenaic 
amphora Munich SL 459“, Fig. 19. In spite of 
the difference in Dionysus’s position, the resem- 
blance to our picture is apparent in the compo- 
sition, the stance of the figures, the drapery, 
and a number of details. Note, for instance, 
the Satyrs. Those of Munich 1568, and still 
more those on the New York vase, are extremely 
like the Stockholm Satyrs. 

These pictures are further closely intercon- 
nected by other details. Thus, the goat on Würz- 
burg 210 is also found on the Vogell and on the 
New York vase and on Munich SL 459. On 
these four vases and on the one in Berlin, 
Dionysus holds the vine, which spreads to both 
sides in a decorative way. In most other pictures 
of this group, including our own, Dionysus 
does in fact hold the vine, although the design 
does not give as decorative and pleasing an 

The four neck-amphorae which Beazley “com- 

’ ABV, p. 370, no. 136, our Figs. 14-15. 

• ABV, p. 371, no. 145, our Fig. 16. 

* ABV, p. 372, no. 155. Gerhard, Auserlesene griech. 
VasenbUder, pl. 32; [Boehlau] Griech. Altertüiner aus 
dem Besitze d» Herrn A. Vogell, Karlsruhe: Cassel 26— 
30 Mai 1908, pl. 2,8. 

“ABV, p. 373, no. 174, Gaz. Arch. 1875, pl. 29, CV 
Gallatin Coli., pl. 38,2. 

“ABV, p. 369, no. 121. Sieveking, Bronzen, Terra- 
kotten, Vasen der Samnü. Loeb, pl. 40; our Figs. 18 — 19. 

pares” with the Group of Würzburg 210“ and 
to which he adds our vase as a fifth, all have 
similar scenes in which Dionysus is the centre. 
The similarities in composition, stance, drapery, 
etc., between them and those around Würzburg 
210, are apparent. In fact it is easier to define the 
conunon features than to explain the differences, 
although these too are apparent. The four vases 
are, moreover, not all connected with the main 
Group of Würzburg 210 in exactlythe same way. 
Two, Villa Giulia M. 486 and Vatican 393, seem 
to me to be closer to each other than to the 
rest. On both, the outlines are less distinct 
than on the vases just discussed. Compare, for 
instance, the goats in both pictures“; if set side 
by side with the rather magnificent goats on 
Würzburg 210, Munich SL 459 (Figs. 9 and 19) 
and New York 41.162.179“, it is at once clear 
that the quality of the first two is inferior and 
that they are very alike. — It is further evident 
that the Stockholm vase does not resemble 
these, nor in fact the other two. 

Of the other two, Naples Stg. 148, Fig. 17, is 
said by Beazley to “recall the Group of Würz- 
burg 210 and the Acheloos Painter”“, while 
about the other, Villa Giulia 50619, he says 
*‘B is very like the Acheloos Painter, A recalls 
the Group of Würzburg 210”“. An example of 
these Connections with the Acheloos Painter is 
the picture of revellers on the latter vase. It 
recalls, for instance, the komos by the Acheloos 
Painter on an amphora in New York“. 

“Naples Stg. 148, ABV, p. 371, no. 141, our Fig. 17. 
Vüla Giulia (M. 486), ABV, p. 373, no. 184, Minoazzini, 
Vasi della CoU. Castellani, no. 486, pl. 77,2 (wrongly given 
as 77,1 in the tcxt), pls. 69,4 and 71,3 (A). Vatican 393, 
ABV, p. 374, no. 191, Mus. ctr. Greg. 2, pl. 35,2; Albiz- 
ZATi, Vasi ant. dipinti del Vaticano, fase. 6, pl. 56. Villa 
Giulia 50619, ABV 374, no. 193, Minoazzini, op. cit., no. 
497, pls. 77,1 (wrongly given in the text as 67,1) and 74,8 

“ Minoazzini, pl. 77,2 and albizzati, pl. 56. 

“ See above, note 10. 

“ABV, p. 371, no. 141. 

“ ABV, p. 374, no. 193. 

Kevorkian Coli. ABV, p. 383, no. 10, Beazley, 
Development of Attic B.-f., pl. 43,1, Cat. Christie March 
26 1953, pl. 2. 


Digitized by LjOOQle 

Fig. 12. British Museum, Panathenaic amphora B 206. 

Fig. 13. British Museum, Panathenaic amphora B 206. 

Fig. 14. West-Berlin, Staatliche Museen, neck-amphora 
F 1845. 

Fig. 15. West-Berlin, Staatliche Museen, neck-amphora 
F 1845. 

This brings up the question of the Connections 
between this vase-painter“ and the Group of 
Würzburg 210. In fact, two of the vases dis- 
cussed earlier, belonging to the main group, are 
still nearer the Acheloos Painter, namely the 
neck-amphora Berlin 1845 and the Panathenaic 
Munich SL 459, Figs. 14-15, 18-19. On both, 
Herakles is represented on the main side be- 
tween Athena and Hermes, about to mount a 
platform holding a kithara, while on the other 
side Dionysus Stands in the midst of his followers. 

** For the works of the Acheloos Painter, see ABV, pp. 
354, 382 ff., with references. 


According to Beazley, the latter was made by 
the Acheloos Painter himself, while the former 
is “near” him'*. Certainly the Munich Panathe- 
naic is a very fine work, finer than the other 
vases in the group— the difference is, however, 
only slight— and finer than its companion in 
Berlin, although this too is of high quality. The 
resemblance to the works of the Acheloos 
Painter is borne out for instance by his amphora 
Louvre F 272*®, which has the same motif. On 
the other hand, the scenes with Dionysus on 

»• ABV, p. 369, no. 121 and p. 370, no. 136. 

ABV, p. 383, no. 6, CV Louvre 5, III Hc pl. 56,4. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 16, Munich, Museum antiker Kleinkunst, neck- Fig. 17. Naples, Museo Nazionale, neck-amphora Sant- 
amphora 1568. angelo 148. 

Fig. 18. Munich, Museum antiker Kleinkunst, Pan- Fig. 19. Munich, Museum antiker Kleinkunst, Pan- 
athenaic amphora SL 459. athenaic amphora SL 459. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

the Munich and Berlin vases are not to be 
separated from the other works in the Group 
of Würzburg 210, in the same way as Naples 
Stg. 148 and Villa Giulia S0619, mentioned 
above, recall this group. The fact is that, if 
one goes through the works of the Acheloos 
Painter, the general resemblance between them^ 
and those of our group is striking. It may be 
that the figures of the latter are in general a 
little less vigorous and fleshy than those of the 
Acheloos Painter. If one compares the pictures 
with revellers of, or like, him, mentioned above, 
with the same motif on New York 41.162.179“, 
one may perceive something of this; in any 
case, the rendering of the folds seems not quite 
so voluminous. It should be stressed, however, 
that the difference is very small. Further, the 
most characteristic works of the Acheloos Pain- 
ter Show a drastic sense of humour and a 
boisterousness“ which the pictures of our group 
seem to lack. On the other hand, many of his 
works lack these features just as much as do 
those of our group. Thus, through all this 
Beazley’s words are bome out, “The fact is that 
the two groups are sometimes indistinguish- 

Indeed, it seems easier to define the difference 
between them in terms of subject than of style. 
Characteristic motifs of the Acheloos Painter 
are the exploits of Herakles, and revellers, 
while Dionysus is the favourite subject of the 
Group of WUrzburg 210. It is probably also 
typical that, when the subjects of the formet, for 
instance Herakles playing the kithara, or re- 
vellers, are found on works of our group, then 
the resemblance between the groups is especially 
evident. — One may ask oneself whether the 
pictures of Dionysus and those that go with 
them were painted by an artist, or artists, who 
had studied the style of the Acheloos Painter so 
closely as to be almost indistinguishable from 

“ See above, notc 10. 

“ Cf. c.g. Beazley, Development p. 86. 

“ABV, p. 369, no. 121. 

him; or whether the Acheloos Painter made 
them himself, but at those moments when he 
was not quite at his highest level. 

Be that as it may, the neck-amphora of Medd- 
havsmuseet 1962:7 is a characteristic work o 
the Group of WUrzburg 210, its nearest com- 
panions being the two neck-amphorae in Würz- 
burg, the one in Toronto, and the Panathenaic 
amphora in London. 

The shape of the vase Medelhavsmuseet 1%2:7 
is a neck-amphora of Standard type, with 
comparatively straight shoulders and body 
tapering to a narrow base (Fig. 20). Its general 
type points to the late sixth Century and may 
be compared, roughly, with Richiier & Milne. 
Shapes and names of Athenian vases, Fig. 14, 
and Caskey, Geometry of Greek vases, nos. 10 
and 11“. 

“ The neck-amphora Richter and Milne Fig. 14, dated 
to the end of the sixth Century, is a little more slender than 
our vase. Caskey nos. 10 and 1 1 have more similar pro- 
portions; no. 11, Boston 89.258, is a work of the Anii- 
menes Painter, Beazley, ABV p. 276 no. S (above), and 
thus roughly Contemporary with our vase. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

Fig. 21. Medelhavsmuseet 1962:7, graffiti. 

Fig. 22, Naples, Museo Nazionale, Santangelo 148, 

The development of the neck-amphora, as 
well as of the amphora and the hydria, in the 
late sixth Century has been traced by Hansjörg 
Bloesch“. He summarizes the development 
down to ca. 510 as a tendency to change stout 
forms into slender ones; at that time a renewed 
preference for stoutness arises which is again 
followed by a tendency towards lighter and more 
refined forms. He further isolates the works of 
three individual potters or groups of potters 
among the late Archaic neck-amphorae, in the 
main through the characteristic shapes of the 
feet and lips of the vases, namely the Group of 
Lea-neck-amphorae, the Club-foot Potter and 
the Canoe Potter. 

The shapes of pots can only be studied with 
Profit on the pots themselves or from drawings 
and photographs taken so as to render the shape 

“JHS71 1951 pp. 29 ff. 

without distortions**. The material of this sort 
available to me is slight, yet it seems to me that 
the Stockholm vase is not to be attributed to 
any of these potters. Thus, the Club-foot Potter 
is excluded on account of the different feet of 
his vases. This is interesting since the name- 
piece of our group, Würzburg 210, is one of 
his works*’. Further, the Lea-neck-amphorae, 
and those of the Canoe Potter, although they 
have more in common with our vase, yet differ 
too much in shapes and profiles. It is to be 
noted that Würzburg 214, another member of 
our group, is attributed to the Lea-neck-am- 
phorae**. It is probably significant that the 

•• The requirements are defined by Bloesch, op. cit. p. 
29 notc 2. 

Bloesch, p. 38 and p. 33, Fig. 17 (profiles). 

•• The Lea-neck-amphorae, Bloesch, p. 38, with exam- 
ples of profiles, p. 33, Fig. 16. The Canoe Potter, p. 38, 
with typical profiles, p. 33, Figs. 18—20, and shapes, pl. 
19 d, e, f. 

Digitized by LjOOQle 


Stockholm vase, as regards the shape, has more 
in common with the vases placed at the be- 
ginning of the three groups than with the later 
ones**. Further, the foot and, to some extent 
the lip, has a counterpart in, for instance, the 
neck-amphora Munich 1486, dated around 510 
B.C., which in its tum is very like Munich 
1480 A, in this respect, of the preceding decade*®. 
I would suggest that the potter of the Stockholm 
neck-amphora used forms like these as his 
models'; he varied them a little but in a more 
moderate way than the potters studied by 

It has already been noted that two of the 
vases of the Group of Würzburg 210 have been 
identified as the works of two different potters. 
Even if my theory conceming the Stockholm 
vase should be wrong— so that it belongs to, 
let US say, the Lea-neck-amphorae*^ — one must 
admit the possibility that one or more of the 
unattributed members is the work of some 
other potter. Thus, the vases of the Group of 
Würzburg 210, so few and so closely inter- 
connected, were made by at least two potters, 
probably three and more. While our knowledge 
of the vase-paintings and their artists has been 
brought nearly to perfection in later years, we 
know far less about the potters. A study of 
their work and of the co-operation between 
them and the painters would be of great 

The graffiti on the underside of the vase (Fig. 
21) are carelessly drawn: one notes that in the 
ligature the Stylus has slipped; they were probably 
engraved after firing. Both figures found on the 

•• Cf. c.g. WUrzburg 214, no. 1 of the Lea-neck-am- 
phorae, Würzburg 210, no. 2 of theClub-foot Potter, and 
London B 220, no. 1 of the Canoe Potter, CV British Mus. 
4, III He pl. 53,4, Bloesch, pl. 19 d. 

•® Bloesch, p. 37; the profiles of Munich 1486 are seen 
on p. 33, Fig. 15, and those of Munich 1480A on Fig. 13. 

” The Club-foot Potter seems to be excluded, on ac- 
count of the widely different profiles of his feet. 

“ This has often been stressed, see e.g. Bloesch, op. cit. 
p. 29.— An interesting picture of the work in an Athenian 
pottery is given by Bei^ey in Potter and painter in ancient 
Athens, pp. 25 ff 

Stockholm vase occur also on two other vases 
of the Group of Würzburg 210, namely the 
neck-amphorae Naples Stg. 148 (Fig. 22) and 
Würzburg 214”. They have been discussed by 
Hackt in Merkantile Inschriften auf attischen 
Vasen, who lists thirty-six instances of the ligature 
and twenty-one of the “arrow””; the latter is in 
every case but one combined with the ligature. 
Hackt put forward the theory that the ligatures 
and other signs, of the same type as on our 
vase, were in general made by, or on behalf of, 
the traders. He suggested that they were usually 
put on one vase in every ordered tot, to serve as 
a reminder for the maker, or as a sort of address. 
A certain number of the marks may further 
have been made by the potter, for his own or his 
colleagues' benefit”. 

While there seems no groimd to doubt that 
Hackfs theories are essentially correct, a 
renewed study of the graffiti would probably 
add much of interest. Thus, the material now 
available is more extensive; the chronology of 
the Attic vases is securely established, through 
the study of the vase-paintings; our knowledge 
of ancient industry and trade has increased. 
Through all this a comprehensive study of the 
graffiti would probably be more profitable now 
than it was at the beginning of the Century. 
Greek vases are in fact-beside their importance 
for the history of art — a source of information 
about practices in industry and trade, probably 
also about social and economic conditions in 
the ancient world. 

” The ^aifiti of Würzburg 214 arc illustrated in Lang- 
LOTz, Griech. Vasen in Würzburg, p. 174. — Three more 
vases of this group have graffiti of a different shape, namely 
Würzburg 210, Lanolotz, p. 174, Berlin F 1M5, Furt- 
wÄNOLER, Beschr. der Vasensaniml. im Antiquarium, 
pl. 1, and Munich SL 459, a carelessly engraved alpba 
(information from the museum). 

”Hackrs work was published in Münchener aicb. 
Studien dem Andenken Adolf Furtwänglers gewidmet, in 
1909. The graffiti here discussed are listed on pp. 39 f. and 
46 f., the Würzburg vase under nos. 393 and 526, the Na- 
ples vase, possibly, imder 402 and 532. (WÜrzburg 210 is 
no. 508 and Berlin 1845 no. 509.) 

” Op. cit., pp. 94 f. A summary is given by Richter, 
Attic red-fig. vases, pp. 19 ff. 


Digitized by LjOOQle 

A Republican Portrait from the Sabina 


The portrait that is reproduced in Figures 1 — 3, 
a gift to Medelhavsmuseet from His Majesty the 
King, was bought in Rome in November 1960. 
It arrived in Stockholm in February 1961 and 
its accession number is MM 1961:2. 

The portrait is executed in a white, fine-crys- 
talline, very hard marble, presumably Grecian. 
It has a narrow portion of the bust and was 
probably inserted in a Statue^. Naturally it is 
also conceivable that it was mounted as a bust 
also in classical times. Its height is 32 cm. This 
head is extraordinarily well preserved and has 
only a few minor injuries: the nose-tip is missing 
as well as pieces of the Shells of the ears, especi- 
ally in the case of the right ear. While the surface 
of the left half of the face is quite fresh, the 
right side is slightly abraded by water or sand 

The portrait represents what one would call 
a true Roman, depicted in the unadomed man- 
ner that was fashionable in Roman portraiture 
in the time of Pompey and Caesar. It is the 
image of an elderly but still vigorous man with 

^ Such small busts with rather unevenly hewn rims are 
common during the last Century B.C. Of. O. Vessberg, 
Studien zur Kunstgeschichte der römischen Republik, 
Taf. LVI:2, LX, LXX:2, LXXXIV:!, 2, LXXXVI. 

grim features which nevertheless leave room for 
a certain good-naturedness. The face is lean with 
strong jaws and prominent cheek-bones. The 
mouth with the thin, tight lips is framed by 
deep furrows. The nose, unusually well pre- 
served despite the missing tip, is broad and 
fleshy, and has a sweUing at the side of the left 
nostril. The eyes are overhung by shaggy, jutting 
eyebrows curving outwards. The wrinkles of the 
forehead are carefully noted and the V-shaped 
vein in the middle of the brow makes an effective 
crown-piece to the architecture of the head. 
Realistically rendered are also the veins at the 
temple. A bunch of wrinkles radiales from the 
comers of the eyes and two long, parallel 
wrinkles define the cheek in relation to the ear. 
The neck is scraggy with several horizontal 
wrinkles and sharply marked tendons. The hair 
is faintly marked like a hood, which only just 
rises above the skin of the face. The surface of 
the hair is roughly carved with shallow chisel 
cuts and grooves. Here it is quite clear that the 
hair must have been painted. 

This is, as we see, a face depicted with great 
realism in detail, but the details are put together 
with the firm intention of giving a synthesis of 
the Personality. Indeed, he comes to us life-like 
and very much alive, this grim old man with a 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

glint of goodness and humour in the slightly 
screwcd-up eyes. Now what is his time? 

To begin with, it is easy to see where his 
dosest stylistic counterparts are. Among many 
possibilities I will mention as particularly strik- 
ing examples the foUowing: two busts in the 
Museo Nazionale in Naples*, two heads in the 
Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen*, one 
portrait head, probably from a tomb relief, in 
the Museo Nuovo in Rome^ (Fig. 4), one head 
from Palestrina in the Museo delle Terme in 
Rome^, and one head from a tomb relief in the 
Villa Colonna in Rome* (Fig. 5). These are exam- 
ples of Late Republican verism in its original 
form. For the broad structure of the face with the 
powerful jaws the two busts in Naples provide 
particularly good parallels. Note the drawing of 
the wrinkles on the head in Glyptoteket 561 
(espedally of the furrows in the cheek) and on the 
head from Palestrina in the Museo delle Terme, 
and compare particularly the treatment of the 
hair on the Glyptoteket head 564: “flat hood, 
whose details would be rendered by painting” (F. 
Poulsen). This hair type in the form of a hood 
with the hair almost graphically sketched, is very 
characteristicof Late Republican portraiture and 
indicates that painting was a fundamental element 
in these portraits. 

The above-dted parallels to the Medelhavs- 
museet’s most reccnt portrait acquisition are 
Late Republican works from the closing decades 
of the Republic. The two portrait busts in 

* A. Ruesch, Guida illustrata del Museo Nazionale 
di Napoli, No. 1104; Vessbero, Studien, Taf. LX111:2 
and 3— 4. 

* F. Poulsen, Katalog over antike skulpturer, Nos. 561 
and 564; V. Poulsen, Les portraits Romains 1 (Public- 
ations de la Glyptoth^ue Ny Carlsberg No. 7), Nos. 20 
and 22; Vessbero, Studien, Taf. LXVII:l-2, 3-4. 

* H. Stuart Jones, The Sculptures of the Palazzo dei 
Conservatori, p. 233, No. 17; D. Mustilli, II Museo 
Mussolini, p. 5, No. 5; Vessbero, Studien, Taf. LXIX. 

* B. M. Felletti Maj, Museo Nazionale Romano, 
I Ritratti, No. 59; Vessbero, Studien, Taf. LXXXII:4; 
E. Buschor, Das hellenistische Bildnis, p. 63. 

•Fr. Matz— F. v. Duhn, Antike Bildwerke in Rom 
mit Ausschluss der grösseren Sammlungen, No. 3816; 
Vessbero, Studien, Taf. XXXVIII: 1. 


Naples represent an eariier group characterized 
by a less rigid modelling, a less emphasized bony 
framework and a strong link with the purely 
Hellenistic line in Contemporary portrait art, 
while the two heads 561 and 564 in the Glyptotek 
in Copenhagen belong to a later line of evoludon 
that is characterized by a drier and somehow 
harder verism. It is to this line that our portrait 

The portrait stems from the Sabina. It was o 
interest to us to clarify its provenance, and Axel 
Boethius— who first saw the head in Rome— and 
the author of these lines made a little trip to- 
gether in the autumn of 1961 to the eariier home 
of the portrait, the little town of Montopoli di 
Sabina. We could there verify the facts given 
by the art-dealer in Rome about the place where 
the head had been kept before he acquired it 
It had previously been located in a villino outside 
Montopoli, built in 1831 and belonging to the 
Torlonia family. There, together with other 
heads, it had stood on the balustrade of a 
terrace. Socles and postaments for the heads 
still exist and metal rods for fixing them. But 
the heads themselves were removed after an 
attempted theft about fifteen or twenty years ago. 
The terrace borders the road and was passed by 
the peasants from Montopoli when they went 
out to their fields. Legends seem to have grown 
up roimd the heads. An octogenarian in Monto- 
poli relates that // co/vo, as he called our portrait, 
represented un gran signore^ govematore della 
Sabina, who was surrounded by il suo consiglki ^ . 
Thus, the head stood for a long time in this 
Position and may perhaps have been part of the 
original decoration of the house. After the 
attempted theft the head was kept inside the 

^ For information I am grateful to Axel Boöthius, 
who on a subsequent visit to Montopoli di &bina 
leamed more about the eariier history of our head. 

Fig, /. Roman male portrait, MM 1961:2, Medelhavs' 
museet, Stockholm, 

Digitized by LjOOQle 

Fig. 2. MM 1961:2. Fig. 3. MM 1961:2. 

villino in the care of one of the two families who 
live in the house and it was sold by this family 
to the Roman art-dealer from whom it passed 
into the possession of our Museum. Of the 
other sculptures that were on the terrace before 
the attempted theft, there remain two herms, 
which are still kept inside the house^. 

Naturally, there is much to suggest that the 
portrait was found in this district. It is a natural 
find-site for a work of this kind. The veristic 
Late Republican portraiture has in Italy a very 
uniform distribution throughout Latium and 
Etruria, while in the rest of the country, espe- 
cially in the south of Italy, its occurrence is rare. 
A group of portrait statues in Chiusi provide 
some parallels, locally quite dose*, and they also 

• Greek portrait types with prototypes from the 4th 
Century B.C., perhaps from the libraiy of some Roman 
Villa in the Sabine Mountains (A. Boethius). 

• Vessberg, Studien, Taf. LXXXV. 


give certain suggestions with regard to the dating. 
For judging by the toga types they are from 
the time of transition to the Imperial sculpture 
and at all events belong to the second half of 
the last Century 

The most striking parallel, however, is the 
above-mentioned portrait on a relief in the Villa 
Colonna in Rome. This relief is made up of 
two parts, one comprising two portrait busts, a 
woman named Manlia Rufa and a man, Manlius 
Stephanus, the other consisting of the bust of an 
elderly man without inscription. This latter por- 
trait comes remarkably dose to our head. The 
powerful structure of the head with the empha- 
sized breadth across the cheek-bones, which 
gives the face an almost Mongol look, is the 

O.C., pp. 240 f. 

Digitized by v^ooQle 

same in both. We may further compare the 
form of the mouth with the enclosing curved 
fuiTOws and the powerfully marked jaws, the 
naiTOw and quite small eyes with thin lids 
overhung by strong brows, the arrangement of 
the hair in a thin hood with roughly hewn 
surface. The strongly marked wrinkles of the 
neck are also a feature common to both portraits, 
which is particularly characteristic of the style 
of the time. 

1 have earlier dated the portrait in the Villa 
Colonna to c. 40 The basis of the chrono- 
logical System lies at this time to an exceptional 
degree in the coin-types. They show that the 
Late Republican realism in portraiture reaches 
its height in the middle of the Century, particular 
Support for this being provided by the coin- 
types of Postumius Albinus^*, Antius Restio^^ 
Pompey'^ and Caesar^*. With regard to the first 
three of these, one has to reckon with an interval 
between the time of the original prototype and 
that of the coin-type which may, at most, run to 
three or four decades^®. Consequently, the 
portraits of Caesar are of paramount impor- 
tance. A large group of these constitute the 
first example of Roman coin portraits that are 
not posthumous, and where on the whole there 
is identity of time between the original proto- 
type and the coin-type. They provide the reliable 
evidence for the development of Caesar’s por- 
trait from the last year of his life and the decades 
immediately after his death. They not only 
reflect the changed opinion about Caesar but 
also the stylistic evolution in the important 
period, also from the art historian’s point of view, 

“ Vessberg, Studien, pp. 198 ff. 

H. A. Grueber, Coins of the Roman Republic in 
the British Museum I, pp. 507 ff.; E. A. Sydenham, The 
Coinage of the Roman Republic, p. 158; Vessberg, 
Studien, pp. 132 ff. 

“Grueber, o. c. I, p. 521; Sydenham, o. c., p. 162; 
Vessberg, Studien, p. 134. 

“Grueber, o. c. II, pp. 366 f., 560 f., 564 f., 370 ff.; 
Sydenham, o. c., pp. 171 ff.; Vessberg, Studien, pp. 135 ff. 

“Grueber, o. c. I, pp. 542 ff.; Sydenham, o. c., pp. 
176 ff.; Vessberg, Studien, pp. 138 ff. 

“ Cf. Vessberg, Studien, pp. 132 ff. 

Fig. 4. Roman male portrait. Museo Nuovo, Rome. 

Fig. 5. Tomb releif in the Villa Colonna, Rome. Detail. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 

of the Second Triumvirate. They span Republi- 
can to Augustan portraiture. However, thcy arc 
not alone in this function, being supported by a 
number of other important coin portraits from 
the Second Triumvirate, and thus we have an 
unusually clear picture of the portrait art of 
this period. 

The most realistic group of coin-typcs with 
Caesar, mainly belonging to the issues of coinage 
from 44 and 43 B.C., continue in their piain 
rendering of the dictator's prematurely aged 
countenance the tradition of the portraits of 
Postumius Albinus and Antius Restio. But they 
also mark the end of a style, for at the same time 
there already appears on the coins struck by 
Flaminius Chilo^’ a portrait of Caesar in which 
the realism has been toned down and sub- 
ordinated to a firmer and more synthetic form. 
Our portrait from Montopoli, like the portrait 
in the Villa Colonna and the stylistically very 
similar portrait in the Museo Nuovo, is probably 
at the same stage in the evolution, and all three 
might suitably be grouped with Chilo’s image of 

Grubber, o. c. I, pp. 565 f.; Sydenham, o. c., p. 180; 
Vessberg, Studien, p. 142. 

Caesar^*. A datmg of our head to the beginning 
of the Second Triumvirate, to c. 40 B.C., would 
therefore seem natural. 

However, as, inter alia, the series of tomb 
reliefs shows^*, the late Republican realism con- 
tinues for a long time side by side with the classi- 
cism, and if all extemal criteria for dating, such 
as form of the bust, dress, inscription and so 
forth, are lacking in identifying a portrait, then 
one must exercise a certain caution. It is dangerous 
to regard the Republican realism as an exclusi- 
vely Republican style. 

Hence I think we have to reckon with a 
certain margin for the date of our head. 

Our association of i7 cälvo with the reiief in 
the Villa Colonna, which in all probability was 
found in or near Rome, and with the head in the 
Museo Nuovo, which is undoubtedly of Roman 
provenance, makes it perhaps most likely that 
our portrait was also a Roman find, which by 
way of the Torlonia collections came to be 
placed in that family's villino at Montopoli di 

“ Cf. Vessberg, Studien, pp. 199 f. 

” Cf. Vessberg, Studien, pp. 201 ff. 


Digitized by v^ooQle 


O. Ekberg, pp. 11, 18 (Fig. 24a). 28 (Fig. 4Sb), 29 (Figs. 47a, 
49b), 55 —59, 69 —70, and photo on tbe cover. 

N. Lagergren, pp. 6-10, 12-17, 18 (Figs. 23, 24b, 25), 19-26, 
28-29 (excq>t Figs. 45b. 47a, 49b), 30-31, 43, 65 (Fig. 21). 


B. Mfflberg, p. 64. 

DigitizecJ by v^ooQle 

Price: 20 Sw. crowns 

Digitized by